From anriette at apc.org Tue Apr 1 05:31:53 2014 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:31:53 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF Assessments Call for information In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> Dear all this is important. Compiled responses would be good if possible. Anriette -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IGFmaglist] Call for information Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:07:12 +0300 From: Janis Karklins To: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org Dear MAG members, As we discussed during the last conference call pls see the call for information concerning the concrete actions and decisions that have been taken as a result of the engagement at the various IGFs. Pls disseminate this call as wide as possible and encourage organization provide a brief account. Thank you JK The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on Internet governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide a platform for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and possible solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify and disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions. Over the past few years, some critics of the IGF have suggested that no actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that it is just a "talk shop". In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" of the IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and decisions that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs (international, regional or national). In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and institutions that would be willing to share information, *on a voluntary basis*, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 and 2013 IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGF Secretariat (insert the e-mail address) by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat will compile all information received and will present a synthesized report at the Istanbul IGF. Thank you for your participation Janis Karklins Interim Chair of the MAG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Igfmaglist mailing list Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.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 kichango at gmail.com Tue Apr 1 15:46:47 2014 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 19:46:47 +0000 Subject: [governance] DNS [Property or Public Good] In-Reply-To: <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> References: <53362153.7040806@cavebear.com> <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> Message-ID: Hi Jeanette, Karl: So you've made the case for avoiding the concept of "property," indeed for its inadequacy, wrt the DNS. What about the other side of the coin? Can the DNS be considered a public good? That is, the DNS as lnternet logical infrastructure --not his or that gTLD or this or that domain name. Thanks, Mawaki On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > Hi Karl, > > +1 > > The term property suggests a totality and uniformity of ownership that in > practice often turns out to be wrong. Ownership is always subject to > conditions and those may vary across and time and political/juridical > cultures. This also means that exclusive rights and obligations are not > fixed forever but are negotiable. > > jeanette > > Am 29.03.14 02:26, schrieb Karl Auerbach: > > On 03/28/2014 06:17 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >> >> 1. Is the DNS property or public good? >>> >> >> The word "property" is very heavily overloaded by cultural and legal >> context. >> >> I find it much better to avoid that word altogether and rather to >> consider the collection of rights and obligations that person X has to >> thing Y. >> >> For example, with regard to domain names X could be the registrant and >> X's rights include the right to delegate name servers, to sub-delegate, >> etc. While the obligations might include paying fees, providing contact >> information, etc etc. >> >> Same for registrars - they have certain rights and obligations with >> regard to that same domain name (from the prior paragraph above) such >> acting as the intermediary to a registry, etc etc. >> >> Some people may consider those contractual things. But to me that is >> merely a difference in words without real difference in substance. >> >> I suggest, therefore, that in discussing these sorts of things that we >> can avoid a lot of miscommmunication by avoiding the difficult word >> "property". >> >> --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 andrespiazza at gmail.com Tue Apr 1 18:22:02 2014 From: andrespiazza at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9s_Piazza?=) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 19:22:02 -0300 Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?LACNIC=B4s_Webex_Session_on_IPv4_Exha?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?ustion?= Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, The purpose of this communication is to invite you to a a virtual session (via WebEx) during which we will provide an update on the latest developments related to the impending exhaustion of LACNIC's IPv4 address pool. These session will also provide an opportunity to openly discuss recommendations for a stable, safe and final transition to IPv6 and the current status of this technology. The event will be held on April 4th at 7pm UTC Time, 4pm in Montevideo and 3pm in Port Spain. More information available here: https://eventos.lacnic.net/ev3/agotamientoipv4sociedadcivil/detail After processing your online registration, you will receive the link to access the conference. Kind Regards, Andrés Piazza Public Affairs Officer LACNIC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 1 19:09:39 2014 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 16:09:39 -0700 Subject: [governance] DNS [Property or Public Good] In-Reply-To: References: <53362153.7040806@cavebear.com> <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> Message-ID: I'm doing this on an ipad so please excuse it being terse... I am not suggesting that we avoid notions such as control or alienabiliy or the right to exclude others.. Rather I am simply suggesting that we stay away from culturally loaded words such as"property". I would prefer that we use the concept of the rights and duties that arise rather than bundling all that under the ambiguous word "property". --karl-- > On Apr 1, 2014, at 12:46 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > > Hi Jeanette, Karl: > > So you've made the case for avoiding the concept of "property," indeed for its inadequacy, wrt the DNS. What about the other side of the coin? Can the DNS be considered a public good? That is, the DNS as lnternet logical infrastructure --not his or that gTLD or this or that domain name. > Thanks, > > Mawaki > > >> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >> Hi Karl, >> >> +1 >> >> The term property suggests a totality and uniformity of ownership that in practice often turns out to be wrong. Ownership is always subject to conditions and those may vary across and time and political/juridical cultures. This also means that exclusive rights and obligations are not fixed forever but are negotiable. >> >> jeanette >> >> Am 29.03.14 02:26, schrieb Karl Auerbach: >> >>> On 03/28/2014 06:17 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >>> >>>> 1. Is the DNS property or public good? >>> >>> The word "property" is very heavily overloaded by cultural and legal >>> context. >>> >>> I find it much better to avoid that word altogether and rather to >>> consider the collection of rights and obligations that person X has to >>> thing Y. >>> >>> For example, with regard to domain names X could be the registrant and >>> X's rights include the right to delegate name servers, to sub-delegate, >>> etc. While the obligations might include paying fees, providing contact >>> information, etc etc. >>> >>> Same for registrars - they have certain rights and obligations with >>> regard to that same domain name (from the prior paragraph above) such >>> acting as the intermediary to a registry, etc etc. >>> >>> Some people may consider those contractual things. But to me that is >>> merely a difference in words without real difference in substance. >>> >>> I suggest, therefore, that in discussing these sorts of things that we >>> can avoid a lot of miscommmunication by avoiding the difficult word >>> "property". >>> >>> --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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 kichango at gmail.com Tue Apr 1 20:25:50 2014 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 00:25:50 +0000 Subject: [governance] DNS [Property or Public Good] In-Reply-To: References: <53362153.7040806@cavebear.com> <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> Message-ID: I got that, Karl --and sorry for your ipad pain :) My question is this: Is this answer of yours also an answer (if only indirectly) to the question of DNS as public good. Well, assuming one can formulate a definition of public good without positively relying on the concept of property as culturally overloaded as it is -- but then again if the implication of your repeated answer is that such formulation of a definition of 'public good' is impossible, then yes your repeated answer is the only thing I can get. Is the unbundling of rights and duties (on specific pieces/instances of the DNS) the only way you see fit for the question of the DNS (as a whole) as possible public good, too? mawaki On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > I'm doing this on an ipad so please excuse it being terse... > > I am not suggesting that we avoid notions such as control or alienabiliy > or the right to exclude others.. Rather I am simply suggesting that we > stay away from culturally loaded words such as"property". I would prefer > that we use the concept of the rights and duties that arise rather than > bundling all that under the ambiguous word "property". > > --karl-- > > On Apr 1, 2014, at 12:46 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > > Hi Jeanette, Karl: > > So you've made the case for avoiding the concept of "property," indeed for > its inadequacy, wrt the DNS. What about the other side of the coin? Can the > DNS be considered a public good? That is, the DNS as lnternet logical > infrastructure --not his or that gTLD or this or that domain name. > Thanks, > > Mawaki > > > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > >> Hi Karl, >> >> +1 >> >> The term property suggests a totality and uniformity of ownership that in >> practice often turns out to be wrong. Ownership is always subject to >> conditions and those may vary across and time and political/juridical >> cultures. This also means that exclusive rights and obligations are not >> fixed forever but are negotiable. >> >> jeanette >> >> Am 29.03.14 02:26, schrieb Karl Auerbach: >> >> On 03/28/2014 06:17 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >>> >>> 1. Is the DNS property or public good? >>>> >>> >>> The word "property" is very heavily overloaded by cultural and legal >>> context. >>> >>> I find it much better to avoid that word altogether and rather to >>> consider the collection of rights and obligations that person X has to >>> thing Y. >>> >>> For example, with regard to domain names X could be the registrant and >>> X's rights include the right to delegate name servers, to sub-delegate, >>> etc. While the obligations might include paying fees, providing contact >>> information, etc etc. >>> >>> Same for registrars - they have certain rights and obligations with >>> regard to that same domain name (from the prior paragraph above) such >>> acting as the intermediary to a registry, etc etc. >>> >>> Some people may consider those contractual things. But to me that is >>> merely a difference in words without real difference in substance. >>> >>> I suggest, therefore, that in discussing these sorts of things that we >>> can avoid a lot of miscommmunication by avoiding the difficult word >>> "property". >>> >>> --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 >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 joly at punkcast.com Wed Apr 2 04:19:52 2014 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 04:19:52 -0400 Subject: [governance] WEBCAST TODAY 10:30am EDT: US House IANA Transition Hearing Message-ID: Hopefully with everyone over their jetlag from the trip back from Singapore, the US Congress now gets to talk IANA. Since the NTIA globalization announcement back on March 14, politicians from Newt Gingrichto Sarah Palin have raised concerns that it is a US giveaway of a strategic asset. Congress is certainly going to paying close attention as the process develops. Every Internet user worldwide has an interest in the four factors in the hearing's title - Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom - and thus the answers to the questions listed below. We in turn should pay close attention to Congress, joly posted: "On Wednesday April 2 2014, at 10.30am EDT, the U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology will a hearing Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet in" [image: Energy + Commerece]On *Wednesday April 2 2014, at 10.30am EDT*, the U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology will a hearing *Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet*in Washington DC. The topic under discussion will be the proposed transfer of the IANA stewardship from the United States to the global Internet community. Witnesses are *Larry Strickling* of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, *Fadi Chehade* of ICANN, former Ambassador *David Gross*, *Steve DelBianco* of NetChoice, and *Carolina Rossini* of the OTI. The hearing will be webcast live via Ustream. *What*: Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet *Where*: Washington DC *When*: Wednesday April 2 2014, 10.30am EDT | 1530 UTC *Webcast*: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/energyandcommerce2322 *Background memo*: http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402-SD002-U1.pdf *Twitter*: #SubCommTech| #IANA *Topics*: - How will NTIA collect and assess proposals? Has a process been determined? Is there a timeline in place for a decision? - Does transition of the IANA functions out of NTIA have implications for national security? - How will NTIA ensure that any transition is smooth and does not affect the daily functioning of the Internet? - What will be the result if NTIA does not receive a proposal that satisfies the criteria it set forth? Does NTIA plan to exercise the automatic option for renewal on the IANA contract if a satisfactory proposal is not received? - What sort of multi-stakeholder community would be the ideal replacement for NTIA's role in the IANA functions? - What safeguards will be in place to prevent a future change that would allow for governments to seize control? - What oversight role should Congress play to ensure a successful outcome. - What will be the practical impact of this transition on Internet users and businesses that utilize the Internet for commerce? Comment See all comments *Permalink*: http://isoc-ny.org/p2/6488 -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.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 joly at punkcast.com Wed Apr 2 08:25:13 2014 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 08:25:13 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: WEBCAST TODAY 10:30am EDT: US House IANA Transition Hearing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Correction. This starts at 1430 UTC. On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 4:19 AM, Joly MacFie wrote: > Hopefully with everyone over their jetlag from the trip back from > Singapore, the US Congress now gets to talk IANA. Since the NTIA > globalization announcement back on March 14, politicians from Newt > Gingrich to Sarah > Palin have > raised concerns that it is a US giveaway of a strategic asset. Congress is > certainly going to paying close attention as the process develops. Every > Internet user worldwide has an interest in the four factors in the > hearing's title - Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom - and thus > the answers to the questions listed below. We in turn should pay close > attention to Congress, > > joly posted: "On Wednesday April 2 2014, at 10.30am EDT, the U.S. > House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on > Communications and Technology will a hearing Ensuring the Security, > Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet in" > > [image: Energy + Commerece]On *Wednesday April 2 2014, at 10.30am EDT*, > the U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's > Subcommittee on Communications and Technology will a hearing *Ensuring > the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet*in Washington DC. The topic under discussion will be the proposed > transfer of the IANA stewardship from the > United States to the global Internet community. Witnesses are *Larry > Strickling* of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, *Fadi Chehade* of ICANN, > former Ambassador *David Gross*, *Steve DelBianco* of NetChoice, and *Carolina > Rossini* of the OTI. The hearing will be webcast live via Ustream. > > *What*: Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the > Global Internet > *Where*: Washington DC > *When*: Wednesday April 2 2014, 10.30am EDT | 1430 UTC > *Webcast*: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/energyandcommerce2322 > *Background memo*: > http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402-SD002-U1.pdf > *Twitter*: #SubCommTech| > #IANA > > *Topics*: > > - How will NTIA collect and assess proposals? Has a process been > determined? Is there a timeline in place for a decision? > - Does transition of the IANA functions out of NTIA have implications > for national security? > - How will NTIA ensure that any transition is smooth and does not > affect the daily functioning of the Internet? > - What will be the result if NTIA does not receive a proposal that > satisfies the criteria it set forth? Does NTIA plan to exercise the > automatic option for renewal on the IANA contract if a satisfactory > proposal is not received? > - What sort of multi-stakeholder community would be the ideal > replacement for NTIA's role in the IANA functions? > - What safeguards will be in place to prevent a future change that > would allow for governments to seize control? > - What oversight role should Congress play to ensure a successful > outcome. > - What will be the practical impact of this transition on Internet > users and businesses that utilize the Internet for commerce? > > Comment See all comments > > > *Permalink*: > http://isoc-ny.org/p2/6488 > > > > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.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 andrea at digitalpolicy.it Wed Apr 2 11:52:32 2014 From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 17:52:32 +0200 Subject: [governance] REMINDER and CLARIFICATION / NETmundial / European Commission to facilitate a conference call for information sharing Message-ID: [ *Apologies if you receive this message multiple times. Please share with your contacts.* ] Please be reminded of the announcement below; please also note that due to daylight saving time, the correct time-zone for the call is actually CEST (Central European *Summer* Time, UTC +2 hours). To avoid any misunderstanding, just keep in mind that the host of the conference call is based in *Brussels,** Belgium*. +++ http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/netmundial-european-commission-facilitate-conference-call-information-sharing In view of the forthcoming Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (NETMundial, http://www.netmundial.br/) which will take place in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on 23-24 April 2014, the European Commission is organising an open conference call, with the purpose of sharing information among stakeholders. The online meeting will be facilitated by the European Commission, but we do expect stakeholders to actively contribute to the conversation. We kindly ask those who plan to attend the conference call and would like to share their views with other participants, possibly on the basis of their / their organisation's contribution to NETmundial, to *let us know in advance*so that we can allocate a fair number of slots for interventions. Details of the conference call (phone numbers, PIN, and Adobe Connect data) are below: · Date: 8 April 2014 · Time: 11:00 - 13:00 (CEST) · Telephone number: 02 808 1363 (if calling from Belgium - for a list of international number, please see the attached PDF document) · Conference room number: 1327846 · Adobe Connect URL: http://ec-wacs.adobeconnect.com/ag4682/(please note that you do *NOT* need to use Adobe Connect to participate in the teleconference - it's offered as an option) As background information, you might want to go through the contributions which have been submitted to NETmundial. They are available at http://content.netmundial.br/docs/contribs. The European Commission has submitted two contributions, which are available at http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/internet-governance-principles/176and http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/roadmap-for-the-further-evolution-of-the-internet-governance-ecosystem/177. Thanks for your kind attention. We hope you will join us for this discussion. Best regards, -- 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20120920_EU-InternationalAccessNumbers-EN.PDF Type: application/pdf Size: 115457 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 rishab.bailey at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 13:25:38 2014 From: rishab.bailey at gmail.com (Rishab Bailey) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 22:55:38 +0530 Subject: [governance] NetMundial News Message-ID: Hi All, Please find appended below the first of an occasional update from Knowledge Common on the NetMundial meeting coming up in Sao Paolo. Warm Regards, Rishab (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) *Welcome to the first edition of NetMundial News from Knowledge Commons!* *********** Knowledge Commons is a consortium of community media, academics and technologists based in India and Brasil. For more information please visit www.knowledgecommons.in and www.kcbrasil.org and follow us on Twitter @KCNetMundial *********** President Dilma Roussef issued a strong call for a global compact on Internet Governance at her speech at the UN General Assembly in September 2013 following revelations about surveillance on various Brasilian institutions by the NSA. The NetMundial meeting to be held 23-24 April in Sao Paolo, will craft new Principles for governing the Internet and a road map for reform of current governance structures. NetMundial represents an important turning point in the debate on democratizing Internet Governance. The NetMundial diplomatic conference will be held at the Hyatt hotel and will negotiate the principles and road map. Several Knowledge Commons delegates have been accepted into the NetMundial and are keen to meet up with other like minded people and organisations! The ArenaNetMundial will be held at the Sao Paolo Cultural Centre starting 22 February and will feature a series of incredible panel events and speakers from around the world. *Stand by for the full program*! Knowledge Commons will be transmitting news and updates from the conference* - let us know if you would like to be on our mailing list by writing to: * info at knowledgecommons.in*. * Knowledge Commons has made two submissions to the meeting - on policy and technical issues - and has summarized all187 submissions from governments, NGOs and companies. Our analysis of the submissions, explained in this infographic, shows that - 31 came from governments (individual and group), 105 civil society, 42 private sector, 3 UN and 6 Multistakeholder - 99 from the North, 64 from the South, 24 from Global - 127 submitted by men, 51 by women, 9 non-gendered - 18 submissions mention gender - 50 out of 187 submissions protest mass surveillance - while almost all mention privacy - 110 out of 187 submissions insist that human rights online - 135 out of 187 submissions acknowledge that the multistakeholder model needs reform and improvement - 145 out of 187 submissions affirm the fact that governments have a role to play in internet governance - 63 out of 187 submissions explicitly support the globalization or internationalization of ICANN & its IANA function - 46 out of 187 submissions explicitly support the strengthening and reform of the Internet Governance Forum Many principles are under discussion in the submissions including: - Drag net surveillance is not legitimate and should be explicitly outlawed - Surveillance must be necessary, targeted, proportionate and with judicial oversight - Clandestine backdoors into software and hardware violate users human rights - We need new limits on information governments and companies collect, store and use - The Internet is a global knowledge commons not a market place or war theatre - The concentration of legal power and internet traffic through one state is dangerous - Competition and consumer law need to apply to online markets in light of monopolies - Fair and transparent cross border regulation and taxation of global internet businesses - Net neutrality must not be compromised - Digital colonialism of dominant cultures and languages online must be addressed. Of the 187 submissions, a full 135 acknowledge problems with the multistakeholder model of Internet governance, with reform urgently needed to: - Untangle the Internet from the laws of one country - ICANN and the NTIA also agree it's time for the US to withdraw from its role as trustee of the Internet. - Make ICANN in its new "globalized" form horizontally and vertically accountable; most suggest but some overtly state (CGI.br) that ICANN is captured by dominant industries - Many submissions describe how the "multistakeholder" model is suffering from: - *Lack of clear standard operating procedures* including transparent decision making and reporting - *Self selection instead of equitable representation* - many submissions note that those who can afford to be present in the myriad of multistakeholder encounters, usually held in the Global North, can participate, which impacts not only resourced challenged NGOs but also developing countries - *Structures that are not complimentary* - but are difficult to navigate with overlapping mandates - *Vague definitions* - "stakeholders" are not easily or simply defined. Different configurations are required in public policy or technical debates. The technical community is both private and part of civil society. Civil society comprises rights advocates, aid workers, philanthropic ventures, librarians and the media. Similarly, governments comprise bureaucrats, regulators, legislators, jurists, military, intelligence, data protection officers, and civil servants. Simplistically bundling all entities as equal has benefited some actors over others. Of the 187 submissions, 145 have acknowledged that governments have a role to play. - While the precise role is the subject of a long-standing, bitter and polarizing debate, President Rousseff's September 2013 speech at the UN General Assembly and many submissions (for instance that of the German government) call for governments to take up their role and responsibility as representatives of populations - While technical standards and protocols must continue to be framed in an institutionalized bottoms up manner, Knowledge Commons believes that certain public policy functions can only be adequately dealt with through governments working together on such issues as: - Legal and enforceable protection of human rights, including privacy - Cyber warfare and cyber attacks - Regularity issues such as cost of access and net neutrality - Common ownership of domain name spaces, including control of CCTLDs by the country concerned, international control, supervision and oversight of IANA functions - Protection and stability of international telecommunications services (the right against disconnection etc.) To further explain and demystify the above issues, Knowledge Commons has prepared a number of papers, including on: - What is wrong with Internet Governance? and - The false dichotomy between Multistakeholder and Multilateral models We encourage you to sign up and participate in the discussion - after all the Internet is our global knowledge commons! Knowledge Commons Team -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 2 15:21:58 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:21:58 -0400 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model Message-ID: The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology's hearing *Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet * in Washington DC has just finished. The information about the hearing also contains a link to a background memo http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402-SD002-U1.pdf The memo gives the background leading up to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th March "to transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder community". Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of "The Multistakeholder Community". This is the first paragraph of that section: ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary Internet standards under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from governments, Internet users, corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that develop the technology that makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and governments that participate in the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the Internet. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively organized under the international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers and all work to create voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all networks easier. The flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the "multistakeholder model," is what has enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, commerce, social discourse, and innovation. Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if you count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no denying that each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more than one they qualify as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact they are described as " the engineering corps of the Internet". So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? Deirdre -- "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 Apr 2 15:28:23 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:28:23 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [IRPCoalition] IGF Assessments Call for information In-Reply-To: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> References: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> Message-ID: Following Anriette's message yesterday does IGC have any suggestions of "concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 and 2013 IGFs". We have until 30th June for submission. Deirdre On 1 April 2014 05:31, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Dear all this is important. Compiled responses would be good if possible. > > Anriette > > > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IGFmaglist] Call for > information Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:07:12 +0300 From: Janis Karklins > To: > igfmaglist at intgovforum.org > > Dear MAG members, > As we discussed during the last conference call pls see the call for > information concerning the concrete actions and decisions that have been > taken as a result of the engagement at the various IGFs. > Pls disseminate this call as wide as possible and encourage organization > provide a brief account. > Thank you > JK > > > > The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the > Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on Internet > governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide a platform > for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and possible > solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify and > disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions. > > > > Over the past few years, some critics of the IGF have suggested that no > actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that > it is just a "talk shop". > > > > In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" of the > IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and > decisions that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the > engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs(international, regional or national). > > > > In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and > institutions that would be willing to share information, *on a voluntary > basis*, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a > result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 > and 2013 IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGFSecretariat (insert the e-mail address) by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat > will compile all information received and will present a synthesized report > at the Istanbul IGF. > > > > Thank you for your participation > > > > Janis Karklins > > Interim Chair of the MAG > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > IRP mailing list > IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org > https://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/mailman/listinfo/irp > > -- "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 Wed Apr 2 15:42:38 2014 From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com (Fatima Cambronero) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 16:42:38 -0300 Subject: [governance] #GigaNet CALL FOR PAPERS 9th Annual Symposium Message-ID: [image: Bildschirmfoto 2012-03-12 um 09] CALL FOR PAPERS 9th Annual Symposium 1 September 2014 Istanbul, Turkey Deadline for abstract submissions: April 15 2014 The Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) is seeking research submissions about Internet Governance to be presented at its Ninth Annual Symposium, held on 1 September 2014, one day before the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Istanbul, Turkey. GigaNet is a scholarly community that promotes the development of Internet Governance as a recognized, interdisciplinary field of study and facilitates informed dialogue on policy issues and related matters between scholars and governments, international organizations, the private sector and civil society. http://giga-net.org/ Since 2006, GigaNet has organized an Annual Symposium to showcase research about Internet Governance, bringing together researchers and practitioners from a wide range of disciplines and fields. As in previous years, the symposium will provide room to discuss current and future questions as well as the challenges encountered and results achieved in global Internet governance. The 2014 GigaNet Symposium offers researchers a timely opportunity to present their work on our rapidly changing field. Conference themes GigaNet is interested in receiving abstracts related to Internet Governance themes, especially those containing innovative approaches and/or emerging research areas. The program committee welcomes all proposals on topics related to global Internet governance including such themes as: * The WGEC process and outcomes * The WSIS review process and outcomes * The mainstreaming and proliferation of "Internet Governance" * The institutionalization of internet governance * Analysis of the NETmundial meeting * Global Trade, Intellectual Property and Internet Governance * The ICANN separation roadmap from the NTIA We will continue to provide a venue for emerging scholars in the field by offering select panels. Emerging Scholars are those individuals who have received their Ph.D. within the past three years as well as current doctoral students working on their approved doctoral research. Accepted papers from senior scholars will be presented and discussed in a roundtable format involving business, government and technical community representatives, while emerging scholars will present their work in a more traditional academic panel. In both cases, presenters should expect to have conversations about their work with people from a wide range of stakeholder groups. Submissions Interested scholars should submit abstracts of their research paper at the Easy Chair platform: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=giganet2014 Deadline for abstract submissions: April 15 2014 Paper proposals should be submitted following these requirements: § An abstract of 800-1000 words, in English, that describes the paper's main research goal(s) and methodology employed § A short bio note focused on institutional affiliations, advanced degrees, scholarly publications and work in the field of Internet Governance and related issues (for example ICTs). Please include a link to a more detailed CV. § Authors of accepted abstracts must submit their final papers by *15 July 2014*. Those unable to do so will be removed from the program. Process and publication The Program Committee will evaluate submitted abstracts and inform proposal authors of acceptance decisions by email before *1 June 2014*. Accepted submissions and final papers will be published on the GigaNet website. An online publication with selected papers on the main challenges of Internet Governance is also planned for the Istanbul IGF. Registration The GigaNet Annual Symposium is free of charge. However, registration will be required to gain entry to the event venue. Please continue visiting our website for further information about registration, venue and accommodation. If you have any question related to the submission or the symposium activities, please e-mail the Program Committee Chair: j-laprise at northwestern.edu. -- *Fatima Cambronero* Abogada-Argentina Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 Twitter: @facambronero Skype: fatima.cambronero -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 2 15:59:25 2014 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:59:25 -0400 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if you > count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no denying that > each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more than one they qualify > as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact they are described as " > the engineering corps of the Internet". > > So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? Only in part. There are other standards bodies, other orgs that work on numbers, hundreds of DNS orgs, and lots of folk in issue areas that have self-organised in many hundreds of CS bodies to tackle challenges they see. Don't get distracted by something that was probably initially drafted by a 20 year old Congressional intern! -- 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 amedinagomez at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 16:32:02 2014 From: amedinagomez at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Antonio_Medina_G=F3mez?=) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:32:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] #GigaNet CALL FOR PAPERS 9th Annual Symposium In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Fatima muchas gracias por la información Antonio Medina Gomez Presidente Asociación Colombiana de Usuarios de Internet 2014-04-02 14:42 GMT-05:00 Fatima Cambronero : > [image: Bildschirmfoto 2012-03-12 um 09] > > > > > > CALL FOR PAPERS > > > > 9th Annual Symposium > > 1 September 2014 > > Istanbul, Turkey > > > > Deadline for abstract submissions: April 15 2014 > > > > > > The Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) is seeking > research submissions about Internet Governance to be presented at its Ninth > Annual Symposium, held on 1 September 2014, one day before the United > Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Istanbul, Turkey. > > > > GigaNet is a scholarly community that promotes the development of Internet > Governance as a recognized, interdisciplinary field of study and > facilitates informed dialogue on policy issues and related matters between > scholars and governments, international organizations, the private sector > and civil society. http://giga-net.org/ > > > > Since 2006, GigaNet has organized an Annual Symposium to showcase research > about Internet Governance, bringing together researchers and practitioners > from a wide range of disciplines and fields. As in previous years, the > symposium will provide room to discuss current and future questions as well > as the challenges encountered and results achieved in global Internet > governance. The 2014 GigaNet Symposium offers researchers a timely > opportunity to present their work on our rapidly changing field. > > > > Conference themes > > > > GigaNet is interested in receiving abstracts related to Internet > Governance themes, especially those containing innovative approaches and/or > emerging research areas. The program committee welcomes all proposals on > topics related to global Internet governance including such themes as: > > > > * The WGEC process and outcomes > > * The WSIS review process and outcomes > > * The mainstreaming and proliferation of "Internet Governance" > > * The institutionalization of internet governance > > * Analysis of the NETmundial meeting > > * Global Trade, Intellectual Property and Internet Governance > > * The ICANN separation roadmap from the NTIA > > > > We will continue to provide a venue for emerging scholars in the field by > offering select panels. Emerging Scholars are those individuals who have > received their Ph.D. within the past three years as well as current > doctoral students working on their approved doctoral research. > > > > Accepted papers from senior scholars will be presented and discussed in a > roundtable format involving business, government and technical community > representatives, while emerging scholars will present their work in a more > traditional academic panel. In both cases, presenters should expect to have > conversations about their work with people from a wide range of stakeholder > groups. > > > > > > Submissions > > Interested scholars should submit abstracts of their research paper at the > Easy Chair platform: > > > > https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=giganet2014 > > Deadline for abstract submissions: April 15 2014 > > > > Paper proposals should be submitted following these requirements: > > § An abstract of 800-1000 words, in English, that describes the paper's > main research goal(s) and methodology employed > > § A short bio note focused on institutional affiliations, advanced > degrees, scholarly publications and work in the field of Internet > Governance and related issues (for example ICTs). Please include a link to > a more detailed CV. > > § Authors of accepted abstracts must submit their final papers by *15 > July 2014*. Those unable to do so will be removed from the program. > > > > Process and publication > > The Program Committee will evaluate submitted abstracts and inform > proposal authors of acceptance decisions by email before *1 June 2014*. > > > > Accepted submissions and final papers will be published on the GigaNet > website. An online publication with selected papers on the main challenges > of Internet Governance is also planned for the Istanbul IGF. > > > > Registration > > The GigaNet Annual Symposium is free of charge. However, registration will > be required to gain entry to the event venue. Please continue visiting our > website for further information about registration, venue and > accommodation. > > > > If you have any question related to the submission or the symposium > activities, please > > e-mail the Program Committee Chair: j-laprise at northwestern.edu. > > > -- > *Fatima Cambronero* > Abogada-Argentina > > Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 > Twitter: @facambronero > Skype: fatima.cambronero > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net Wed Apr 2 16:44:52 2014 From: jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net (Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 22:44:52 +0200 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3F862841-A3E8-4B2C-90A3-9F73DF2C60D7@theglobaljournal.net> Thanks for sharing this Deirdre. McTim, suggesting that a 20 year old intern did that background brief to serve a congressional subcommittee as this critical one, must be some kind of a joke, I presume. Certainly, an un-paid intern! The overall narrative is pretty much in line with the US reasoning, except that for once, it is more or less raw and plain. We still have a long way to go... I am afraid... JC PS: McTim: if you have the name of that intern, I am pleased to offer him a position. Even though I cannot but disagree with the perspective, the job is rather well done. Le 2 avr. 2014 à 21:21, Deirdre Williams a écrit : > The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology's hearing Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet in Washington DC has just finished. The information about the hearing also contains a link to a background memo http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402-SD002-U1.pdf The memo gives the background leading up to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th March “to transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder community”. Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of “The Multistakeholder Community”. This is the first paragraph of that section: > > ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary Internet standards > > under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from governments, Internet users, > > corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that develop the technology that > > makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and governments that participate in > > the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the Internet. The Internet > > Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet Engineering > > Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively organized under the > > international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers and all work to create > > voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all networks easier. The > > flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the “multistakeholder model,” is what has > > enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, commerce, social discourse, and > > innovation. > > Apart from ICANN four “ad hoc groups” are mentioned directly, five if you count ISOC which “collectively organize[s]” them. There is no denying that each of these five is a “stakeholder”, and, being more than one they qualify as “multi”. However there is no diversity – in fact they are described as “ the engineering corps of the Internet”. > > So is this the “multistakeholder model” that we are discussing? > > Deirdre > > > -- > “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 Wed Apr 2 16:51:06 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 16:51:06 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Anyone interested in reading the formal presentations to the committee can find them here On 2 April 2014 15:21, Deirdre Williams wrote: > The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's > Subcommittee on Communications and Technology's hearing *Ensuring the > Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet > * in > Washington DC has just finished. The information about the hearing also > contains a link to a background memo > http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402-SD002-U1.pdf The > memo gives the background leading up to the National Telecommunications and > Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th March "to > transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder community". > Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of "The > Multistakeholder Community". This is the first paragraph of that section: > > ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary > Internet standards > > under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from > governments, Internet users, > > corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that > develop the technology that > > makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and > governments that participate in > > the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the > Internet. The Internet > > Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the > Internet Engineering > > Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively > organized under the > > international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers > and all work to create > > voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all > networks easier. The > > flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the > "multistakeholder model," is what has > > enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, > commerce, social discourse, and > > innovation. > > Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if you > count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no denying that > each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more than one they > qualify as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact they are > described as " the engineering corps of the Internet". > > So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? > > Deirdre > > -- > "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 gurstein at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 16:59:51 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:59:51 -0700 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0b5b01cf4eb6$7e5a3850$7b0ea8f0$@gmail.com> Really glad to see this McTim. I was getting a bit worried that we would actually have a definition of the "MS model" to discuss but I'm glad you have reassured us that it was all a false alarm and the MS model is still the shape shifting wraith that so many folks here in CS have come to know and love... M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 12:59 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Deirdre Williams Subject: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder model On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if > you count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no > denying that each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more > than one they qualify as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact they are described as " > the engineering corps of the Internet". > > So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? Only in part. There are other standards bodies, other orgs that work on numbers, hundreds of DNS orgs, and lots of folk in issue areas that have self-organised in many hundreds of CS bodies to tackle challenges they see. Don't get distracted by something that was probably initially drafted by a 20 year old Congressional intern! -- 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 suresh at hserus.net Wed Apr 2 21:51:28 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 07:21:28 +0530 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: <0b5b01cf4eb6$7e5a3850$7b0ea8f0$@gmail.com> References: <0b5b01cf4eb6$7e5a3850$7b0ea8f0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: It does shift shape so often when some vocal members of civil society assure us that the technical community forms no part of civil society. This appears to be an effort in the reverse direction. It is quite sad, but what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and for every fringe civil society type trying to exclude the technical community, there's some crusty old neck beard engineer type who rails at those useless civil society types who wouldn't know a router if it bit them, and are trying to teach real engineers how to run the internet. Just as wrong headed and fringe an opinion as the civil society fringe one, but oh well .. --srs (iPad) > On 03-Apr-2014, at 2:29, "michael gurstein" wrote: > > Really glad to see this McTim. I was getting a bit worried that we would > actually have a definition of the "MS model" to discuss but I'm glad you > have reassured us that it was all a false alarm and the MS model is still > the shape shifting wraith that so many folks here in CS have come to know > and love... > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim > Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 12:59 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Deirdre Williams > Subject: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder model > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Deirdre Williams > wrote: > > > >> Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if >> you count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no >> denying that each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more >> than one they qualify as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact > they are described as " >> the engineering corps of the Internet". >> >> So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? > > > Only in part. > > There are other standards bodies, other orgs that work on numbers, hundreds > of DNS orgs, and lots of folk in issue areas that have self-organised in > many hundreds of CS bodies to tackle challenges they see. > > Don't get distracted by something that was probably initially drafted by a > 20 year old Congressional intern! > > -- > 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 lmcknigh at syr.edu Wed Apr 2 22:02:48 2014 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 02:02:48 +0000 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: <3F862841-A3E8-4B2C-90A3-9F73DF2C60D7@theglobaljournal.net> References: ,<3F862841-A3E8-4B2C-90A3-9F73DF2C60D7@theglobaljournal.net> Message-ID: <3df8e4cc31034cfd87641db24b7aecc0@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu> McTim went too far...it probably was not written by a 20 year-old intern, they get stuck with more menial tasks. Odds are principle 'drafter' was a...21-26-year-old committee staffer, cribbing/revising from lobbyist-provided talking points. Hey at least they spelled IAB right. ; ) Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org on behalf of Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:44 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Deirdre Williams Subject: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder model Thanks for sharing this Deirdre. McTim, suggesting that a 20 year old intern did that background brief to serve a congressional subcommittee as this critical one, must be some kind of a joke, I presume. Certainly, an un-paid intern! The overall narrative is pretty much in line with the US reasoning, except that for once, it is more or less raw and plain. We still have a long way to go... I am afraid... JC PS: McTim: if you have the name of that intern, I am pleased to offer him a position. Even though I cannot but disagree with the perspective, the job is rather well done. Le 2 avr. 2014 ? 21:21, Deirdre Williams a ?crit : The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology's hearing Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet in Washington DC has just finished. The information about the hearing also contains a link to a background memo http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402-SD002-U1.pdf The memo gives the background leading up to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th March "to transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder community". Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of "The Multistakeholder Community". This is the first paragraph of that section: ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary Internet standards under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from governments, Internet users, corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that develop the technology that makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and governments that participate in the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the Internet. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively organized under the international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers and all work to create voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all networks easier. The flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the "multistakeholder model," is what has enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, commerce, social discourse, and innovation. Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if you count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no denying that each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more than one they qualify as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact they are described as " the engineering corps of the Internet". So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? Deirdre -- "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 dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 22:16:47 2014 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 22:16:47 -0400 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: <3df8e4cc31034cfd87641db24b7aecc0@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu> References: <3F862841-A3E8-4B2C-90A3-9F73DF2C60D7@theglobaljournal.net> <3df8e4cc31034cfd87641db24b7aecc0@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: Hi Lee, You are correct, it was probably written by someone more senior than an intern, someone who has dozens of issue areas to become conversant with every week. In my defense I said "drafted by". But this is all a red herring becasue I actually made a more important point that some "journalists" and "academics" either deny or refuse to admit exists, to wit: "There are other standards bodies, other orgs that work on numbers, hundreds of DNS orgs, and lots of folk in issue areas that have self-organised in many hundreds of CS bodies to tackle challenges they see." There is a very large and growing MS Internet eco-system. If you are opposed to this politically, well fine, but one can't deny that it actually exists! I had thought this thread had died, but alas..... On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 10:02 PM, Lee W McKnight wrote: > McTim went too far...it probably was not written by a 20 year-old intern, > they get stuck with more menial tasks. > > Odds are principle 'drafter' was a...21-26-year-old committee staffer, > cribbing/revising from lobbyist-provided talking points. > > Hey at least they spelled IAB right. ; ) > > Lee > ________________________________ > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > on behalf of Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS > I The Global Journal > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:44 PM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Deirdre Williams > Subject: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder model > > Thanks for sharing this Deirdre. > > McTim, suggesting that a 20 year old intern did that background brief to > serve a congressional subcommittee as this critical one, must be some kind > of a joke, I presume. Certainly, an un-paid intern! > The overall narrative is pretty much in line with the US reasoning, except > that for once, it is more or less raw and plain. > > We still have a long way to go... I am afraid... > > JC > PS: McTim: if you have the name of that intern, I am pleased to offer him a > position. Even though I cannot but disagree with the perspective, the job is > rather well done. > > > > Le 2 avr. 2014 à 21:21, Deirdre Williams a écrit : > > The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's Subcommittee > on Communications and Technology's hearing Ensuring the Security, Stability, > Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet in Washington DC has just > finished. The information about the hearing also contains a link to a > background memo > http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402-SD002-U1.pdf > The memo gives the background leading up to the National Telecommunications > and Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th March "to > transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder community". > Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of "The > Multistakeholder Community". This is the first paragraph of that section: > > ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary Internet > standards > > under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from governments, > Internet users, > > corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that > develop the technology that > > makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and governments > that participate in > > the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the > Internet. The Internet > > Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the > Internet Engineering > > Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively > organized under the > > international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers and > all work to create > > voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all > networks easier. The > > flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the > "multistakeholder model," is what has > > enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, commerce, > social discourse, and > > innovation. > > Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if you > count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no denying that > each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more than one they qualify > as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact they are described as " > the engineering corps of the Internet". > > So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? > > Deirdre > > > -- > "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 > -- 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 suresh at hserus.net Wed Apr 2 22:48:55 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 08:18:55 +0530 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: <3F862841-A3E8-4B2C-90A3-9F73DF2C60D7@theglobaljournal.net> <3df8e4cc31034cfd87641db24b7aecc0@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: ... And don't be surprised if the people you revile don't want you any more than you want them. --srs (iPad) > But this is all a red herring becasue I actually made a more important > point that some "journalists" and "academics" either deny or refuse to > admit exists, to wit: > > "There are other standards bodies, other orgs that work on numbers, > hundreds of DNS orgs, and lots of folk in issue areas that have > self-organised in many hundreds of CS bodies to tackle challenges > they see." > > There is a very large and growing MS Internet eco-system. If you are > opposed to this politically, well fine, but one can't deny that it > actually exists! > -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Thu Apr 3 08:55:27 2014 From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com (Fatima Cambronero) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 09:55:27 -0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [IRPCoalition] IGF Assessments Call for information In-Reply-To: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> References: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> Message-ID: *(Sorry for cross posting. It includes a correct email address to send your comments).* *The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on Internet governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide a platform for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and possible solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify and disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions.* *Over the past few years, some sceptics of the IGF have suggested that no actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that it is just a "talk shop".* *In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" of the IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and decisions that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs (international, regional or national).* *In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and institutions that would be willing to share information, on a voluntary basis, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 and 2013 IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGF Secretariat (* *discussion_questions at intgovforum.org**) by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat will compile all information received and will present a synthesized report at the Istanbul IGF.* *Thank you for your participation* *Janis Karklins* *Interim Chair of the MAG* 2014-04-01 6:31 GMT-03:00 Anriette Esterhuysen : > Dear all this is important. Compiled responses would be good if possible. > > Anriette > > > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IGFmaglist] Call for > information Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:07:12 +0300 From: Janis Karklins > To: > igfmaglist at intgovforum.org > > Dear MAG members, > As we discussed during the last conference call pls see the call for > information concerning the concrete actions and decisions that have been > taken as a result of the engagement at the various IGFs. > Pls disseminate this call as wide as possible and encourage organization > provide a brief account. > Thank you > JK > > > > The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the > Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on Internet > governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide a platform > for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and possible > solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify and > disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions. > > > > Over the past few years, some critics of the IGF have suggested that no > actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that > it is just a "talk shop". > > > > In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" of the > IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and > decisions that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the > engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs(international, regional or national). > > > > In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and > institutions that would be willing to share information, *on a voluntary > basis*, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a > result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 > and 2013 IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGFSecretariat (insert the e-mail address) by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat > will compile all information received and will present a synthesized report > at the Istanbul IGF. > > > > Thank you for your participation > > > > Janis Karklins > > Interim Chair of the MAG > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > IRP mailing list > IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org > https://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/mailman/listinfo/irp > > -- *Fatima Cambronero* Abogada-Argentina Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 Twitter: @facambronero Skype: fatima.cambronero -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Thu Apr 3 09:45:27 2014 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda Scartezini) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 10:45:27 -0300 Subject: [governance] Re: Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you! I have watched the hearing. Quite interesting! Thanks for sharing this. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 From: "williams.deirdre at gmail.com" Reply-To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "williams.deirdre at gmail.com" Date: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 17:51 To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" Subject: [governance] Re: Multistakeholder model Anyone interested in reading the formal presentations to the committee can find them here On 2 April 2014 15:21, Deirdre Williams wrote: > The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee¹s Subcommittee > on Communications and Technology's hearing Ensuring the Security, Stability, > Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet > e-and-freedom-global-internet> in Washington DC has just finished. The > information about the hearing also contains a link to a background memo > http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402- > SD002-U1.pdf The memo gives the background leading up to the National > Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th > March ³to transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder > community². Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of ³The > Multistakeholder Community². This is the first paragraph of that section: > > ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary Internet > standards > > under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from governments, > Internet users, > > corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that develop > the technology that > > makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and governments > that participate in > > the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the > Internet. The Internet > > Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the > Internet Engineering > > Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively > organized under the > > international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers and > all work to create > > voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all networks > easier. The > > flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the ³multistakeholder > model,² is what has > > enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, commerce, > social discourse, and > > innovation. > > Apart from ICANN four ³ad hoc groups² are mentioned directly, five if you > count ISOC which ³collectively organize[s]² them. There is no denying that > each of these five is a ³stakeholder², and, being more than one they qualify > as ³multi². However there is no diversity ­ in fact they are described as > ³ the engineering corps of the Internet². > > So is this the ³multistakeholder model² that we are discussing? > > Deirdre > > > -- > ³The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -- ³The 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 Thu Apr 3 10:54:23 2014 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda Scartezini) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:54:23 -0300 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not from my perception. Multi will need direct interested companies, users companies, interested governments ,interested users, organised civil society + the engineering group. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 From: "williams.deirdre at gmail.com" Reply-To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "williams.deirdre at gmail.com" Date: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 16:21 To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee¹s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology's hearing Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet in Washington DC has just finished. The information about the hearing also contains a link to a background memo http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-2014040 2-SD002-U1.pdf The memo gives the background leading up to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th March ³to transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder community². Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of ³The Multistakeholder Community². This is the first paragraph of that section: ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary Internet standards under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from governments, Internet users, corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that develop the technology that makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and governments that participate in the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the Internet. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively organized under the international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers and all work to create voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all networks easier. The flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the ³multistakeholder model,² is what has enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, commerce, social discourse, and innovation. Apart from ICANN four ³ad hoc groups² are mentioned directly, five if you count ISOC which ³collectively organize[s]² them. There is no denying that each of these five is a ³stakeholder², and, being more than one they qualify as ³multi². However there is no diversity ­ in fact they are described as ³ the engineering corps of the Internet². So is this the ³multistakeholder model² that we are discussing? Deirdre -- ³The 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 Thu Apr 3 11:00:31 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 11:00:31 -0400 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: That was my perception too - that "multi"= diversity. But the document I shared, whoever created it :-), suggests a different perception - that "multi" simply equals more than one, many. Looking at things from different perspectives is often helpful in reaching an understanding. Deirdre On 3 April 2014 10:54, Vanda Scartezini wrote: > Not from my perception. Multi will need direct interested companies, users > companies, interested governments ,interested users, organised civil > society + the engineering group. > *Vanda Scartezini* > *Polo Consultores Associados* > *Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004* > *01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil* > *Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 <%2B55%2011%203266.6253>* > *Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 <%2B%2055%2011%2098181.1464> * > > > > > From: "williams.deirdre at gmail.com" > Reply-To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , > "williams.deirdre at gmail.com" > Date: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 16:21 > To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" > Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model > > The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's > Subcommittee on Communications and Technology's hearing *Ensuring the > Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet > *in > Washington DC has just finished. The information about the hearing also > contains a link to a background memo > http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-20140402-SD002-U1.pdf The > memo gives the background leading up to the National Telecommunications and > Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th March "to > transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder community". > Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of "The > Multistakeholder Community". This is the first paragraph of that section: > > ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary > Internet standards > > under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from > governments, Internet users, > > corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that > develop the technology that > > makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and > governments that participate in > > the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the > Internet. The Internet > > Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the > Internet Engineering > > Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively > organized under the > > international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers > and all work to create > > voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all > networks easier. The > > flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the > "multistakeholder model," is what has > > enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, > commerce, social discourse, and > > innovation. > > Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if you > count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no denying that > each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more than one they > qualify as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact they are > described as " the engineering corps of the Internet". > > So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? > > Deirdre > > -- > "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.orgTo be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and > functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To 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 parminder at itforchange.net Thu Apr 3 12:41:19 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 22:11:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [ICTs-and-Society] Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression-Declaration! In-Reply-To: <533D8210.2080002@uti.at> References: <533D8210.2080002@uti.at> Message-ID: <533D8F2F.9080303@itforchange.net> Some real freedom of information work, which is not merely fronting for economic and political expansionism through the Internet and informational control route... parminder -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ICTs-and-Society] Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression-Declaration! Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:45:20 +0100 From: Christian Fuchs Reply-To: christian.fuchs at uti.at To: discussion at lists.icts-and-society.net The information society, the Internet and the media are today largely controlled by large corporations such as Google and Facebook and a state-industrial complex. The control mechanisms unveiled by Edward Snowden, the closure of and attack against public service media, repression against critcal journalists, online platforms and activists, and a highly centralised Internet and media economy are characteristic for this situation. We live in an unfree information society with limits to expression and an unfree Internet. Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression Declaration that demands a free Internet, free media and a free information society! The 2014 Vienna Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression Sign: https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_2014_Vienna_Declaration_on_Freedom_of_Information_and_Expression_Petition/ More information and videos of talks from the Freedom of Information Conference: http://freedom-of-information.info/ https://www.youtube.com/user/transformeurope/feed ----------------------- The 2014 Vienna Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression This petition can be signed online at https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_2014_Vienna_Declaration_on_Freedom_of_Information_and_Expression_Petition/ We, the speakers of the Vienna 2014 International Conference “Freedom of Information Under Pressure. Control – Crisis – Culture” (comprised of international academics, media practitioners, librarians, experts of open culture and public space, activists, critical citizens, lawyers and policy makers), sign the following Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression: Having met in Vienna of Austria on 28 February and 1 March 2014 and having discussed the challenges of freedom of information in the light of the recent surveillance revelations and the increase in censorship and prosecutions of media, journalists and whistle-blowers in Europe and beyond, we express our deep concern and appeal for public vigilance to defend freedom of information and expression as key democratic rights. We consider Edward Snowden’s revelations as a wake up call. His story is not about one man leaking classified information; rather it is about privacy, civil liberties, power and democracy. But also about the future of the Internet itself, the nature of democratic oversight - and much more. We condemn the existence of a surveillance-industrial complex, in which the American, British and other European states’ intelligence services conduct mass surveillance of the Internet, social media, mobile and landline telephones, in co-operation with communications corporations such as Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Skype, Yahoo!, Aol as well as private security firms. We express our solidarity and support to whistle-blowers, journalists and organisations, including Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Laura Poitras, Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian and others, for their efforts towards fostering transparency and public accountability. We denounce their oppression and prosecution that we consider as a major threat to freedom of information. We observe a great paradox of the media in the 21st century: although more people than ever have the means to express themselves freely, there are huge power asymmetries that favour corporate and state control of the media: journalists in Europe and many other regions face an alarming increase in violent attacks, intimidation, legal threats and other restrictions on their work. Among the important factors of this paradox are the growth of anti-terrorism laws and new nationalisms, the fusion of political, economic and media power, and the weakening of the authority of critical and high-quality media, including independent media, investigative journalism and public service media. Furthermore, the Internet and social media are largely controlled by corporations and there is not enough material support for alternative Internet and media projects. This mix seems to represent an existential challenge to critical media, independent journalism and to the established framework of international laws and safeguards for press freedom and the freedoms of expression, speech, information and opinion. We point out that the current crisis and austerity policies have a serious negative effect on important democratic freedoms. The official political reactions to the crisis have given grounds for the further centralisation of corporate, state and media power that undermine the freedom of information and further the prosecutions of citizens, activists, journalists and the media. We particularly condemn attempts to limit or close down critical, independent and public service media. The Greek government’s closure of the public service broadcaster ERT is in this respect a particularly alarming development. We stress that under the conditions of corporatisation and bureaucratisation, the potentials created by access to information and public knowledge are hampered. In many countries and at a transnational level we lack adequate laws for the transparency of corporate and state power and citizens’ access to information about it in order to hold those in power accountable. A particularly alarming development of the limitation of freedom of information can be found in the world of libraries: large corporate publishers tend to license access to academic and literary works only in expensive bundles and make the access to easy-to-use e-books difficult and expensive. The result is a limit of public access to cultural works so that people have more and more to rely on purchasing books and articles, which is a matter of purchasing power that disadvantages many citizens. The corporate power of publishing houses thereby limits the public’s right to inform itself. We consider that the right of access to information can promote citizens’ civic and political participation by raising their levels of trust in political and policy-making institutions, while it can fight phenomena such as lobbying and corruption. Open access to public and digitised knowledge and scholarly research is also crucial for the continuous education of the broader public and professionals, the promotion of cultural production and diversity and the preservation of the historic and collective memory. New social media, libraries and archives can and should play an important role in this field. We are convinced that freedom of information is a value worth struggling for and that the current framework and developments strongly threaten freedom, democracy and basic civil liberties. A free culture, a free economy of information and a free polity of information are possible! First signees: Antonis Broumas (Attorney at law, Digital Liberation Network, Greece) Arne Hintz (Lecturer, University of Cardiff, UK) Augustine Zenakos (Journalist, UNFOLLOW magazine, Greece) Barbara Trionfi (Press Freedom Manager, International Press Institute) Christian Fuchs (Professor of Social Media, University of Westminster, UK) Dimitris Tsapogas (Researcher, University of Vienna, Austria) Gerfried Sperl (Journalist, PHOENIX, Austria) Gill Phillips (Director of Editorial Legal Service, The Guardian, United Kingdom) Joachim Losehand (Scholar, VIBE!at, Austria) Kostas Arvanitis (Journalist and Director, Sto Kokkino Radio, Greece) Kostas Efimeros (Publisher, The Press Project, Greece) Lisa Schilhan (VÖB, University of Graz, Austria) Mariniki Alevizopoulou (Journalist, UNFOLLOW magazine, Greece) Minas Samatas (Professor, University of Crete, Greece) Miyase Christensen (Professor, Stockholm University, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, London School of Economics, UK) Nikolaus Hamann (Vienna Public Libraries, KRIBIBI, Austria) Paloma Fernández de la Hoz (Catholic Social Academy, Austria) _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion at lists.icts-and-society.net http://lists.icts-and-society.net/listinfo.cgi/discussion-icts-and-society.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 3 13:14:15 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 10:14:15 -0700 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <03f701cf4f60$241f4ec0$6c5dec40$@gmail.com> I think the operative term there is not "multi" but "stakeholder" and the use of that term rather than referring for example to "the Internet as a global public good" tells it all I think. M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Deirdre Williams Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 8:01 AM To: Vanda Scartezini Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder model That was my perception too - that "multi"= diversity. But the document I shared, whoever created it :-), suggests a different perception - that "multi" simply equals more than one, many. Looking at things from different perspectives is often helpful in reaching an understanding. Deirdre On 3 April 2014 10:54, Vanda Scartezini wrote: Not from my perception. Multi will need direct interested companies, users companies, interested governments ,interested users, organised civil society + the engineering group. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 From: "williams.deirdre at gmail.com" Reply-To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "williams.deirdre at gmail.com" Date: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 16:21 To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder model The U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology's hearing Ensuring the Security, Stability, Resilience, and Freedom of the Global Internet in Washington DC has just finished. The information about the hearing also contains a link to a background memo http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF16/20140402/102044/HHRG-113-IF16-2014040 2-SD002-U1.pdf The memo gives the background leading up to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announcement of 14th March "to transition the IANA functions to the global multi-stakeholder community". Pages 3/ 4 of the memo give a four paragraph explanation of "The Multistakeholder Community". This is the first paragraph of that section: ICANN, as well as the groups that oversee the creation of voluntary Internet standards under the auspices of the Internet Society, receive input from governments, Internet users, corporations investing in the Internet, academics, and engineers that develop the technology that makes the Internet possible. In addition to the corporations and governments that participate in the process, a series of ad hoc groups form the engineering corps of the Internet. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force, now collectively organized under the international non-profit Internet Society (ISOC), are run by volunteers and all work to create voluntary standards for Internet users to make interconnection of all networks easier. The flexibility of this governance structure, referred to as the "multistakeholder model," is what has enabled the explosive growth of the Internet as a driver of jobs, commerce, social discourse, and innovation. Apart from ICANN four "ad hoc groups" are mentioned directly, five if you count ISOC which "collectively organize[s]" them. There is no denying that each of these five is a "stakeholder", and, being more than one they qualify as "multi". However there is no diversity - in fact they are described as " the engineering corps of the Internet". So is this the "multistakeholder model" that we are discussing? Deirdre -- "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 -- "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 Apr 3 13:14:15 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 10:14:15 -0700 Subject: [governance] Net Neutrality: A Great Step Forward for the Free Internet! Message-ID: <040101cf4f60$25b2e710$7118b530$@gmail.com> Net Neutrality: A Great Step Forward for the Free Internet! Submitted on 3 Apr 2014 - 11:46 http://www.laquadrature.net/en/net-neutrality-a-great-step-forward-for-the-f ree-internet Brussels, 3 April 2014 — Today the European Parliament adopted in first reading the Regulation on the Single Telecoms Market. By amending the text with the proposal of amendments made by the Social-Democrats (S&D), Greens (Greens/EFA), United Left (GUE/NGL) and Liberals (ALDE), the Members of the European Parliament took a historic step for the protection of Net Neutrality and the Internet commons in the European Union. La Quadrature du Net warmly thanks all citizens, organisations and parliamentarians who took part in this campaign, and calls on them to remain mobilised for the rest of the legislative procedure. After years of inaction and only a few months before the end of her term in office, EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes1 presented a proposal for the regulation of the Telecom Single Market in Europe in September 2013. Although it claimed to contain a real defence of Net Neutrality, it in fact introduced a version of the principle that stripped it of all real meaning. Despite much criticism2, Kroes rushed the adoption by the European Parliament so that it could be voted before the European elections of May 2014. This positive vote is the direct result of a very strong citizen mobilisation3 and the constructive work of Amelia Andersdotter (Greens/EFA – SE), Catherine Trautmann (S&D – FR), Petra Kammerevert (S&D – DE) and Marietje Schaake (ALDE – NL). The adopted text contains a rigorous definition of Net Neutrality and grants it a normative scope4. While allowing telecom operators to develop offers of Internet access with a quality of service optimised for specific applications that could not run effectively on the so-called "best-effort" Internet, this text provides a good framework for "specialised services" that ensures non-discrimination between the providers of such applications5. Support La Quadrature du Net! Even if some amendments that aimed to give the text greater coherence and clarity or lay out stronger enforcement mechanisms were not adopted, the text passed today represents a clear victory for the protection of the free Internet. This is especially true in comparison of Neelie Kroes' original proposal. La Quadrature du Net warmly thanks all citizens and organisations who took part in this campaign for Net Neutrality, as well as the MEPs who fought hard for the free Internet in the last days of their mandate. In the coming weeks, as the legislative procedure on the regulation will proceed to its next phase, we must maintain the greatest vigilance. It is now to the Council of the European Union (which, along with the European Parliament, is the EU co-legislator), to deliberate next 5 and 6 juin of this year. As national governments are easily influenced by dominant telecom groups, continued public interest and mobilisation is now necessary to ensure that the improvements to the text achieved today are not dismantled6. “Today's victory on Net neutrality is the most important one for the protection of freedom online in Europe since the rejection of ACTA in July 2012. The EU Parliament made clear that the Internet commons should be free of corporate capture, and remain a space where freedom of communication and innovation can thrive. We warmly thank all organisations, citizens, and members of the EU Parliament who worked to achieve this result. We should now all remain watchful for the remainder of the procedure, as the text now goes to the EU Council where many national governments will seek to undermine Net neutrality provisions so as to please their homegrown telecom oligopolies. Even though we won today, the fight for the free Internet continues!” concluded Félix Tréguer, co-founder of the advocacy group La Quadrature du Net. 1. Neelie Kroes is the European Commissioner for “Digital Agenda”. In the months following her appointment as Commissioner in 2010, her position on the question of Net Neutrality evolved from unmitigated support to an alignement with the demands of telecom operators' lobbies. 2. A leaked criticism of a draft by Viviane Reding's services says for example that “such limited possibilities of accessing Internet content and services of their choice would run counter to the stated objectives of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.”: http://www.edri.org/NN-negativeopinions The European Data Protection Supervisor wrote in a press release published on 15 November that Neelie Kroes' proposal voids the principle of Net Neutrality “of substance" "because of the almost unlimited right of providers to manage Internet traffic”. 3. The number of phone calls to MEPs for this vote even surpassed the one for the final vote on ACTA in 2012. 4. See articles 2.14, 23.1 and paragraph 1. 5. See articles 2.15 and 23.2. 6. For instance, only a few hours before today's vote, the French government joined the corporate lobbies to support [FR] a definition of "specialised services" that is incompatible with a real definition of Net Neutrality an the principle of non-discrimiation. This provides an idea of what will be the forces at work in the Council. It is therefore essential not to let this topic leave the public eye and collectively remind national governments of where the public interest lies in the Net Neutrality debate. -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From joly at punkcast.com Thu Apr 3 16:22:52 2014 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 16:22:52 -0400 Subject: [governance] WEBCAST FRI: The Future of Internet Governance Message-ID: The beat goes on! Another chance to hear Larry and Fadi explain the Fadi plan, but this time with McDowell and Verveer. McDowell, it should be remembered was the first U.S. official to raise the alarmover WCIT. joly posted: "On Friday April 4 2014 at 11am EDT the Hudson Institute will host a discussion The Future of Internet Governance in Washington DC. The topic will be the IANA transition. Speakers include Assistant Secretary of Commerce Larry Strickling, ICANN CEO Fadi Che" [image: Hudson Institute]On Friday April 4 2014 at 11am EDT the Hudson Institute will host a discussion *The Future of Internet Governance*in Washington DC. The topic will be the IANA transition . Speakers include Assistant Secretary of Commerce *Larry Strickling*, ICANN CEO *Fadi Chehadé*, former FCC Commissioner *Robert M. McDowell*, and Ambassador *Daniel A. Sepulveda*, who is the U.S. Coordinator for International Communications and Information Policy. The event will be webcast live. *What*: The Future of Internet Governance *Where*: Hudson Institute, Washington, D.C. *When*: Friday April 4 2014 at 11am-12.30pm EDT | 1500-1630 UTC *Webcast*: http://www.hudson.org/ *Twitter*: #iana | @HudsonInstitute Comment See all comments *Permalink*: http://isoc-ny.org/p2/6530 -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.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 joly at punkcast.com Thu Apr 3 16:25:48 2014 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 16:25:48 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: WEBCAST FRI: The Future of Internet Governance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Strike Verveer and insert Sepulveda! On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Joly MacFie wrote: > > The beat goes on! Another chance to hear Larry and Fadi explain the Fadi > plan, but this time with McDowell and Verveer. McDowell, it should be > remembered was the first U.S. official to raise the alarmover WCIT. > > joly posted: "On Friday April 4 2014 at 11am EDT the Hudson Institute > will host a discussion The Future of Internet Governance in Washington DC. > The topic will be the IANA transition. Speakers include Assistant Secretary > of Commerce Larry Strickling, ICANN CEO Fadi Che" > > [image: Hudson Institute]On Friday April 4 2014 at 11am EDT the Hudson > Institute will host a discussion *The Future of > Internet Governance*in Washington DC. The topic will be the IANA > transition . Speakers include Assistant > Secretary of Commerce *Larry Strickling*, ICANN CEO *Fadi Chehadé*, > former FCC Commissioner *Robert M. McDowell*, and Ambassador *Daniel A. > Sepulveda*, who is the U.S. Coordinator for International Communications > and Information Policy. The event will be webcast live. > > *What*: The Future of Internet Governance > *Where*: Hudson Institute, Washington, D.C. > *When*: Friday April 4 2014 at 11am-12.30pm EDT | 1500-1630 UTC > *Webcast*: http://www.hudson.org/ > *Twitter*: #iana| > @HudsonInstitute > > Comment See all comments > > > *Permalink*: > http://isoc-ny.org/p2/6530 > > > > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.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 williams.deirdre at gmail.com Thu Apr 3 16:35:11 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 16:35:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] Twitter in Turkey Message-ID: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26873603 Deirdre -- "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 soekpe at gmail.com Thu Apr 3 18:43:51 2014 From: soekpe at gmail.com (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 23:43:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] Twitter in Turkey In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: True Justice from the Court. Sonigitu Ekpe Mobile +234 805 0232 469 Office + 234 802 751 0179 "LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving" On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26873603 > Deirdre > > -- > "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 suresh at hserus.net Thu Apr 3 20:08:25 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 05:38:25 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [ICTs-and-Society] Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression-Declaration! In-Reply-To: <533D8F2F.9080303@itforchange.net> References: <533D8210.2080002@uti.at> <533D8F2F.9080303@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <9D81D5B7-D245-4647-A75E-7044E2287885@hserus.net> The language right at the beginning starts making a set of assumptions that make me reject wanting to sign any part of it without reading further. The fact that you endorse it - with a very similar description that, again, rejects multistakeholderism that involves industry - makes it conclusive. No, I won't touch this "declaration" (or rather vaguely worded rant) with a twenty foot pole, sorry. --srs (iPad) > On 03-Apr-2014, at 22:11, parminder wrote: > > > Some real freedom of information work, which is not merely fronting for economic and political expansionism through the Internet and informational control route... parminder > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [ICTs-and-Society] Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression-Declaration! > Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:45:20 +0100 > From: Christian Fuchs > Reply-To: christian.fuchs at uti.at > To: discussion at lists.icts-and-society.net > > The information society, the Internet and the media are today largely > controlled by large corporations such as Google and Facebook and a > state-industrial complex. The control mechanisms unveiled by Edward > Snowden, the closure of and attack against public service media, > repression against critcal journalists, online platforms and activists, > and a highly centralised Internet and media economy are characteristic > for this situation. > > We live in an unfree information society with limits to expression and > an unfree Internet. > > Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression Declaration that demands > a free Internet, free media and a free information society! > > The 2014 Vienna Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression > Sign: > https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_2014_Vienna_Declaration_on_Freedom_of_Information_and_Expression_Petition/ > > More information and videos of talks from the Freedom of Information > Conference: > http://freedom-of-information.info/ > https://www.youtube.com/user/transformeurope/feed > > ----------------------- > > The 2014 Vienna Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression > > This petition can be signed online at > https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_2014_Vienna_Declaration_on_Freedom_of_Information_and_Expression_Petition/ > > > We, the speakers of the Vienna 2014 International Conference “Freedom of > Information Under Pressure. Control – Crisis – Culture” (comprised of > international academics, media practitioners, librarians, experts of > open culture and public space, activists, critical citizens, lawyers and > policy makers), sign the following Declaration on Freedom of Information > and Expression: > > Having met in Vienna of Austria on 28 February and 1 March 2014 and > having discussed the challenges of freedom of information in the light > of the recent surveillance revelations and the increase in censorship > and prosecutions of media, journalists and whistle-blowers in Europe and > beyond, we express our deep concern and appeal for public vigilance to > defend freedom of information and expression as key democratic rights. > > We consider Edward Snowden’s revelations as a wake up call. His story is > not about one man leaking classified information; rather it is about > privacy, civil liberties, power and democracy. But also about the future > of the Internet itself, the nature of democratic oversight - and much more. > > We condemn the existence of a surveillance-industrial complex, in which > the American, British and other European states’ intelligence services > conduct mass surveillance of the Internet, social media, mobile and > landline telephones, in co-operation with communications corporations > such as Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Skype, Yahoo!, Aol as well > as private security firms. > > We express our solidarity and support to whistle-blowers, journalists > and organisations, including Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Chelsea > Manning, Laura Poitras, Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian and others, for > their efforts towards fostering transparency and public accountability. > We denounce their oppression and prosecution that we consider as a major > threat to freedom of information. > > We observe a great paradox of the media in the 21st century: although > more people than ever have the means to express themselves freely, there > are huge power asymmetries that favour corporate and state control of > the media: journalists in Europe and many other regions face an alarming > increase in violent attacks, intimidation, legal threats and other > restrictions on their work. Among the important factors of this paradox > are the growth of anti-terrorism laws and new nationalisms, the fusion > of political, economic and media power, and the weakening of the > authority of critical and high-quality media, including independent > media, investigative journalism and public service media. Furthermore, > the Internet and social media are largely controlled by corporations and > there is not enough material support for alternative Internet and media > projects. This mix seems to represent an existential challenge to > critical media, independent journalism and to the established framework > of international laws and safeguards for press freedom and the freedoms > of expression, speech, information and opinion. > > We point out that the current crisis and austerity policies have a > serious negative effect on important democratic freedoms. The official > political reactions to the crisis have given grounds for the further > centralisation of corporate, state and media power that undermine the > freedom of information and further the prosecutions of citizens, > activists, journalists and the media. We particularly condemn attempts > to limit or close down critical, independent and public service media. > The Greek government’s closure of the public service broadcaster ERT is > in this respect a particularly alarming development. > > We stress that under the conditions of corporatisation and > bureaucratisation, the potentials created by access to information and > public knowledge are hampered. In many countries and at a transnational > level we lack adequate laws for the transparency of corporate and state > power and citizens’ access to information about it in order to hold > those in power accountable. > > A particularly alarming development of the limitation of freedom of > information can be found in the world of libraries: large corporate > publishers tend to license access to academic and literary works only in > expensive bundles and make the access to easy-to-use e-books difficult > and expensive. The result is a limit of public access to cultural works > so that people have more and more to rely on purchasing books and > articles, which is a matter of purchasing power that disadvantages many > citizens. The corporate power of publishing houses thereby limits the > public’s right to inform itself. > > We consider that the right of access to information can promote > citizens’ civic and political participation by raising their levels of > trust in political and policy-making institutions, while it can fight > phenomena such as lobbying and corruption. Open access to public and > digitised knowledge and scholarly research is also crucial for the > continuous education of the broader public and professionals, the > promotion of cultural production and diversity and the preservation of > the historic and collective memory. New social media, libraries and > archives can and should play an important role in this field. > > We are convinced that freedom of information is a value worth struggling > for and that the current framework and developments strongly threaten > freedom, democracy and basic civil liberties. > > A free culture, a free economy of information and a free polity of > information are possible! > > First signees: > Antonis Broumas (Attorney at law, Digital Liberation Network, Greece) > Arne Hintz (Lecturer, University of Cardiff, UK) > Augustine Zenakos (Journalist, UNFOLLOW magazine, Greece) > Barbara Trionfi (Press Freedom Manager, International Press Institute) > Christian Fuchs (Professor of Social Media, University of Westminster, UK) > Dimitris Tsapogas (Researcher, University of Vienna, Austria) > Gerfried Sperl (Journalist, PHOENIX, Austria) > Gill Phillips (Director of Editorial Legal Service, The Guardian, United > Kingdom) > Joachim Losehand (Scholar, VIBE!at, Austria) > Kostas Arvanitis (Journalist and Director, Sto Kokkino Radio, Greece) > Kostas Efimeros (Publisher, The Press Project, Greece) > Lisa Schilhan (VÖB, University of Graz, Austria) > Mariniki Alevizopoulou (Journalist, UNFOLLOW magazine, Greece) > Minas Samatas (Professor, University of Crete, Greece) > Miyase Christensen (Professor, Stockholm University, Royal Institute of > Technology, Sweden, London School of Economics, UK) > Nikolaus Hamann (Vienna Public Libraries, KRIBIBI, Austria) > Paloma Fernández de la Hoz (Catholic Social Academy, Austria) > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discussion mailing list > Discussion at lists.icts-and-society.net > http://lists.icts-and-society.net/listinfo.cgi/discussion-icts-and-society.net > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Apr 3 20:13:31 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 05:43:31 +0530 Subject: [governance] Twitter in Turkey In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B21D5B4-59D0-415D-B0B3-2D4ABA26DC4C@hserus.net> Right after that, there's a further block ordered on Youtube. It will be interesting to see how this progresses. --srs (iPad) > On 04-Apr-2014, at 4:13, Sonigitu Ekpe wrote: > > True Justice from the Court. > > Sonigitu Ekpe > > Mobile +234 805 0232 469 Office + 234 802 751 0179 > "LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving" > > > >> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: >> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26873603 >> Deirdre >> >> -- >> “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 karl at cavebear.com Thu Apr 3 23:47:50 2014 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 20:47:50 -0700 Subject: [governance] DNS [Property or Public Good] In-Reply-To: References: <53362153.7040806@cavebear.com> <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <533E2B66.2060109@cavebear.com> On 04/01/2014 05:25 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > My question is this: Is this answer of yours also an answer (if only > indirectly) to the question of DNS as public good. Well, assuming one > can formulate a definition of public good without positively relying on > the concept of property as culturally overloaded as it is -- but then > again if the implication of your repeated answer is that such > formulation of a definition of 'public good' is impossible, then yes > your repeated answer is the only thing I can get. > > Is the unbundling of rights and duties (on specific pieces/instances of > the DNS) the only way you see fit for the question of the DNS (as a > whole) as possible public good, too? Almost any given thing is a blend of useful/good and bad - rights to benefit from that thing in some way and obligations that arise. (We often tend to overlook those obligations.) Sometimes those benefits accrue to - and obligations fall upon - each individual person equally or upon all of us as a community. I would suggest that those kinds of things are "public" values. Other times those benefits and obligations are more focused on a single identifiable person (a natural human or a legal creation such as a corporation). I would suggest that those kind of things are "private" values. When we talk about private property we tend to mean things that land mostly in that latter category, but still (we hope) remember that even the most private of things tends to be subject to the public in some way (often in some way that occurs more as an exception rather than the norm.) So the problem I've wrestled with is what kind of principles can we use to balance those public interests with the private ones. Here's what I came up with: 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. I have found this useful. However, it represents a balance between "me" and "we" that tends to favor the former over the latter. That may be a balance that reflects my US/Canadian roots. It would not surprise me to learn that people from other cultures would strike a different balance. To my mind, finding these kinds of statements of principle would be useful to help us navigate our way through the maze of choices that we have to make as we figure out how to govern - or not govern - various aspects of the internet. --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 nnenna75 at gmail.com Fri Apr 4 02:52:17 2014 From: nnenna75 at gmail.com (Nnenna Nwakanma) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 06:52:17 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Re: [IRPCoalition] IGF Assessments Call for information In-Reply-To: References: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> Message-ID: There is something unsettling to me about this call. And I have been debating with my self: 1. Why is IGF asking for "actions and decisions" now? 2. Why are actions being requested in a forum whose main objective is to "discuss"? 3. Why only "the current slate"? 4. Are we looking at only the "UN" IGFs or regional, subregional or even country IGFs? 5. If a meeting held on margin of an IGF led to some action, can that be reported? TOL (Thinking Out Loud) N On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Fatima Cambronero < fatimacambronero at gmail.com> wrote: > *(Sorry for cross posting. It includes a correct email address to send > your comments).* > > > > *The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the > Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on Internet > governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide a platform > for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and possible > solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify and > disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions.* > > > > *Over the past few years, some sceptics of the IGF have suggested that no > actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that it > is just a "talk shop".* > > > > *In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" of the > IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and decisions > that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the > engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs > (international, regional or national).* > > > > *In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and > institutions that would be willing to share information, on a voluntary > basis, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a result > of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 and 2013 > IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGF Secretariat (* > *discussion_questions at intgovforum.org**) > by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat will compile all information received and > will present a synthesized report at the Istanbul IGF.* > > > > *Thank you for your participation* > > > > *Janis Karklins* > > *Interim Chair of the MAG* > > > > > 2014-04-01 6:31 GMT-03:00 Anriette Esterhuysen : > >> Dear all this is important. Compiled responses would be good if >> possible. >> >> Anriette >> >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IGFmaglist] Call for >> information Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:07:12 +0300 From: Janis Karklins >> To: >> igfmaglist at intgovforum.org >> >> Dear MAG members, >> As we discussed during the last conference call pls see the call for >> information concerning the concrete actions and decisions that have been >> taken as a result of the engagement at the various IGFs. >> Pls disseminate this call as wide as possible and encourage organization >> provide a brief account. >> Thank you >> JK >> >> >> >> The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the >> Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on >> Internet governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide >> a platform for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and >> possible solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify >> and disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions. >> >> >> >> Over the past few years, some critics of the IGF have suggested that no >> actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that >> it is just a "talk shop". >> >> >> >> In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" of the >> IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and >> decisions that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the >> engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs(international, regional or national). >> >> >> >> In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and >> institutions that would be willing to share information, *on a voluntary >> basis*, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a >> result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, >> 2012 and 2013 IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGFSecretariat (insert the e-mail address) by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat >> will compile all information received and will present a synthesized report >> at the Istanbul IGF. >> >> >> >> Thank you for your participation >> >> >> >> Janis Karklins >> >> Interim Chair of the MAG >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> IRP mailing list >> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org >> https://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/mailman/listinfo/irp >> >> > > > -- > *Fatima Cambronero* > Abogada-Argentina > > Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 > Twitter: @facambronero > Skype: fatima.cambronero > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 4 03:22:24 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 12:52:24 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [IRPCoalition] [bestbits] Re: IGF Assessments Call for information In-Reply-To: References: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> Message-ID: <533E5DB0.2080004@itforchange.net> On Friday 04 April 2014 12:22 PM, Nnenna Nwakanma wrote: > There is something unsettling to me about this call. And I have been > debating with my self: > > 1. Why is IGF asking for "actions and decisions" now? > 2. Why are actions being requested in a forum whose main objective is > to "discuss"? > Since you asked, let me be frank if blunt... Because there is a great amount of activity and discussion going on about gaps in global governance of the Internet with regard to public policy 'making' (the enhanced cooperation debate) and there is much effort to posit the argument that 'the IGF is enough' , whereby no specific public policy 'making' mechanism is needed. And since you rightly point out, IGF is to 'discuss' and that should normally not be enough, a somewhat desperate case is being made out that such discussions have led to necessary actions (and thus IGF is enough) I agree, it is unsettling. IGF and its duty holders should stay neutral in this larger debate and not support any one side . They should just to their job, which is to convene and inefficiently run a global multistakeholder public policy dialogue parminder > > 1. Why only "the current slate"? > 2. Are we looking at only the "UN" IGFs or regional, subregional or > even country IGFs? > 3. If a meeting held on margin of an IGF led to some action, can that > be reported? > > TOL (Thinking Out Loud) > > > N > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Fatima Cambronero > > wrote: > > *(Sorry for cross posting. It includes a correct email address to > send your comments).* > > > * > * > > /The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on > the Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform > on Internet governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to > provide a platform for information exchange, identify emerging > challenges and possible solutions to addressing them, provide > capacity building, identify and disseminate best practices and > forge partnerships for concrete actions./ > > // > > /Over the past few years, some sceptics of the IGF have suggested > that no actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at > the IGF - that it is just a "talk shop"./ > > // > > /In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" > of the IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete > actions and decisions that have been taken by different > stakeholders as a result of the engagement and discussions of > Internet related issues at the various IGFs (international, > regional or national)./ > > // > > /In this respect, I would like to invite all of those > organizations and institutions that would be willing to share > information, *on a voluntary basis*, about concrete decisions or > actions that have been taken as a result of engagement during the > current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 and 2013 IGFs to do so > by sending brief information to the IGF Secretariat > (//discussion_questions at intgovforum.org/ > /) by 30 June 2014. > The Secretariat will compile all information received and will > present a synthesized report at the Istanbul IGF./ > > // > > /Thank you for your participation/ > > // > > /Janis Karklins/ > > /Interim Chair of the MAG/ > > > > 2014-04-01 6:31 GMT-03:00 Anriette Esterhuysen >: > > Dear all this is important. Compiled responses would be good > if possible. > > Anriette > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [IGFmaglist] Call for information > Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:07:12 +0300 > From: Janis Karklins > > To: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org > > > > > > Dear MAG members, > As we discussed during the last conference call pls see the > call for information concerning the concrete actions and > decisions that have been taken as a result of the engagement > at the various IGFs. > Pls disseminate this call as wide as possible and encourage > organization provide a brief account. > Thank you > JK > > The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit > on the Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion > platform on Internet governance related issues. The goals of > the IGF are to provide a platform for information exchange, > identify emerging challenges and possible solutions to > addressing them, provide capacity building, identify and > disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete > actions. > > Over the past few years, some critics of the IGF have > suggested that no actions have been taken and that no > decisions are made at the IGF - that it is just a "talk shop". > > In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action > orientation" of the IGF it would be useful to collect data > about concrete actions and decisions that have been taken by > different stakeholders as a result of the engagement and > discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs > (international, regional or national). > > In this respect, I would like to invite all of those > organizations and institutions that would be willing to share > information, *on a voluntary basis*, about concrete decisions > or actions that have been taken as a result of engagement > during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 and 2013 > IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGF > Secretariat (insert the e-mail address) by 30 June 2014. The > Secretariat will compile all information received and will > present a synthesized report at the Istanbul IGF. > > Thank you for your participation > > Janis Karklins > > Interim Chair of the MAG > > > > > _______________________________________________ > IRP mailing list > IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org > > https://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/mailman/listinfo/irp > > > > > -- > /*Fatima Cambronero*/ > Abogada-Argentina > > Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 > Twitter: @facambronero > Skype: fatima.cambronero > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > > _______________________________________________ > IRP mailing list > IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org > https://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/mailman/listinfo/irp -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 4 05:16:37 2014 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 09:16:37 +0000 Subject: [governance] DNS [Property or Public Good] In-Reply-To: <533E2B66.2060109@cavebear.com> References: <53362153.7040806@cavebear.com> <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> <533E2B66.2060109@cavebear.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:47 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > Here's what I came up with: > > 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. > > I have found this useful. However, it represents a balance between "me" > and "we" that tends to favor the former over the latter. That may be a > balance that reflects my US/Canadian roots. It would not surprise me to > learn that people from other cultures would strike a different balance. > > To my mind, finding these kinds of statements of principle would be > useful to help us navigate our way through the maze of choices that we > have to make as we figure out how to govern - or not govern - various > aspects of the internet. > Thanks! m. > > --karl-- > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From Guru at ITforChange.net Fri Apr 4 06:13:07 2014 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 15:43:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: need for regulation .... In-Reply-To: <531D9366.9060301@ITforChange.net> References: <531D9366.9060301@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <533E85B3.3040701@ITforChange.net> In an earlier mail (below), I had discussed the need for the Google search engine (as the de facto organiser of the worlds information for most of us, hence the gatekeeper) to be functioning on a public accountability (and hence transparency) mode. This will include public participation in the algorithm design, social/public/community audit of the algorithm to ensure there is no distortions being inserted in the algorithms to feed political/economic vested interests etc.... http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/22838-facebook-and-the-future-of-global-governance discusses similar ideas regarding Facebook, which is fulfilling a critical social function, and hence, cannot be dictated purely by private profit considerations alone.... While article also makes some suggestions on ways forward, it is perhaps more important to first acknowledge that these are important points for global public policy making relating to IG.... and then discuss possibilities from a public interest advancement perspective. regards Guru On 03/10/2014 03:56 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: > Dear all, > > Not clear, how in Multistakeholderism, where the private sector has an > equal footing in public policy making, we will get Google to agree > that its search algorithm, as the key factor organising the worlds > information/knowledge for all of us, needs to be public knowledge, not > a commercial secret. The need for it to be public knowledge stems from > privacy/surveillance concerns, because such fundamental knowledge > ought to be available as 'cultural commons' that others can > take/re-use/revise, fostering competition etc. > > regards, > Guru > > Google faces Rs 30,500-cr fine in India > New Delhi, PTI: March 9, 2014 > > Google can face a penalty of up to about $5 billion if it is found to > have violated competition norms of the country. Google, which is > facing anti-trust investigation in India by fair trade watchdog > Competition Commission of India (CCI), can face a penalty of up to > about $5 billion (Rs 30,500 crore) if it is found to have violated > competition norms of the country. > > Google said it is “extending full cooperation” to the CCI in its > investigation. The conclusion of a two-year review by the US antitrust > watchdog has concluded that the company's services were good for > competition, it added. The case has been before the CCI for over two > years now, and it relates to allegations that Google is abusing its > dominant position. Under competition regulations, an entity found > violating the norms could be slapped with penalty of up to 10 per cent > of its three-year annual average turnover. In the case of Google, its > annual revenues in the last three years amounts to a staggering $49.3 > billion (Rs 3.01 lakh crore), and the maximum penalty can be up to > nearly $5 billion. > > When asked about the ongoing probe and the potential penalty, a Google > spokesperson said: “We are extending full co-operation to the > Competition Commission of India in their investigation.” The emailed > statement added: “We're pleased that the conclusion of the Federal > Trade Commission's two-year review was that Google's services are good > for users and good for competition.” > > A complaint filed with the CCI cannot be withdrawn. The complaint > against Google, also one of the world's most valued company, was first > filed by advocacy group CUTS International way back in late 2011. > Later. Matrimonial website matrimony.com Private Ltd also filed a > complaint. Last year, CCI chairman Ashok Chawla had said the complaint > was that the Google search engine favours platforms it wants to support. > > “That is, when you click on Google under a certain category, you will > get the platforms where there is a tendency to put them in a certain > order which may not be the fair and non-discriminatory. So, *what is > the software and what is the algorithmic search, (that is) what the > investigation team is looking at,” *Chawla had said. > > source - > http://www.deccanherald.com/content/390977/google-faces-rs-30500-cr.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 4 12:28:58 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 09:28:58 -0700 Subject: [governance] FW: [JoCI] Special Issue: Building the First Mile of Broadband Connectivity + Invitation to Online Launch Message-ID: <08ce01cf5022$fb689900$f239cb00$@gmail.com> -----Original Message----- From: Michael Gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 9:24 AM To: Michael Gurstein Subject: [JoCI] Special Issue: Building the First Mile of Broadband Connectivity - Commun + Invitation to Online Launch Readers: The Journal of Community Informatics has just published its latest issue at http://ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej. We invite you to review the Table of Contents here and then visit our web site to review articles and items of interest. We also invite you to an online launch of the special issue of the Journal of Community Informatics (JoCI) on the First Mile of Broadband Connectivity - Communities Doing It for Themselves. Authors will speak about their research and the communities they are working with. We will also launch the Community Informatics declaration: An Internet for the Common Good. Please join us for this exciting and informative event by watching the live stream and participating in the chat. The event will go live at 15:30 Atlantic Canada time on April 4: http://live.knet.ca/fni Thanks for the continuing interest in our work, Michael Gurstein Ph.D. Editor in Chief: Journal of Community Informatics, Vancouver CANADA Phone 604-602-0624 gurstein at gmail.com The Journal of Community Informatics Vol 10, No 2 (2014): Special Issue: Building the First Mile Table of Contents http://ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/issue/view/43 Editorial -------- The First Mile of Brodband Connectivity in Communities: Introduction to the Special Issue Rob McMahon, Duncan Philpot, Susan O'Donnell, Brian Beaton, Tim Whiteduck, Kevin Burton, Michael Gurstein The Multistakeholder Model, Neo-liberalism and Global (Internet) Governance Michael Gurstein Points of View -------- The Ecology of Community Networking Richard Lowenberg Articles -------- The First Mile Approach to Community Services in Fort Severn First Nation Matthew Kakekaspan, Susan O'Donnell, Brian Beaton, Brian Walmark, Kerri Gibson Bridging the Divide: Understanding and Implementing Access to the Internet as a Human Right Michael Karanicolas Understanding Broadband Infrastructure Development in Remote and Rural Communities – a Staged and Reflexive Approach Ingjerd Skogseid, Ivar Petter Grøtte, Geir Liavåg Strand First Mile Challenges to Last Mile Rhetoric: Exploring the Discourse between Remote and Rural First Nations and the Telecom Industry Duncan Philpot, Brian Beaton, Tim Whiteduck ICT for sustainable development: an example from Cambodia Helena Grunfeld >From the First Mile to Outer Space: Tamaani Satellite Internet in Northern Quebec Rob McMahon, Thomassie Mangiok Opportunities and Challenges for First-mile Development in Rural Hawaiian Communities Jenifer Sunrise Winter, Wayne Buente, Patricia Amaral Buskirk Developing an e-Community Approach to Community Services in Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nation Gilbert Whiteduck, Anita Tenasco, Susan O'Donnell, Tim Whiteduck, Emily Lockhart Local Communities and Home Rule: Extending the Alberta SuperNet to Unserved Areas Nadine I Kozak The Cancellation of the Community Access Program and the Digital Divide(s) in Canada: Lessons Learned and Future Prospects Chris Blanton An African Rural Internet Network, and its interactions with Academics Gertjan van Stam, Darelle van Greunen Notes from the field -------- Building Broadband Infrastructure from the Grassroots: the Case of Home LANs in Belarus Aljona Zorina, William H. Dutton GoFred: Municipally-Owned ICT Utilities in Fredericton, New Brunswick Mike Richard, Duncan Philpot Rural Communications – What is a Rural Municipality’s Role? Allan Bly Building First Nation Owned and Managed Fibre Networks across Quebec Tim Whiteduck, Brian Beaton Settler Colonialism and First Nations e-Communities in Northwestern Ontario Brian Beaton, Peter Campbell Information and Communication Technology for Education in an Algonquin First Nation in Quebec Emily Lockhart, Anita Tenasco, Tim Whiteduck, Susan O'Donnell The First Mile Connectivity Consortium and Digital Regulation in Canada Rob McMahon, Heather Hudson, Lyle Fabian ________________________________________________________________________ The Journal of Community Informatics http://www.ci-journal.net -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 4 13:42:32 2014 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 13:42:32 -0400 Subject: [governance] FYI, An internet governance model for the 21st century Message-ID: http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/twt/archive/view/198543 -- 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 garth.graham at telus.net Fri Apr 4 14:40:54 2014 From: garth.graham at telus.net (Garth Graham) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 11:40:54 -0700 Subject: [governance] DNS [Property or Public Good] In-Reply-To: <533E2B66.2060109@cavebear.com> References: <53362153.7040806@cavebear.com> <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> <533E2B66.2060109@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <975F2E9D-B4F6-4ED3-82E2-E9AD06A1AC42@telus.net> While I admire the clarity of your first law, it feels to me that, when you define the corporate as a person and then state an onus on other "persons" to prove that a corporate action leads to public detriment, you get something backwards, particularly with respect to obligation, responsibility and accountability . And, as an aside re values, I see obligation as a corollary of the Golden Rule. In common law, the relation of the individual to the state still remains - that which is not stated is not implied. As a Canadian, I am aware that my fellow Canadians often delay acting on their obligations because there might be a rule somewhere that forbids it. That transference of responsibility on to the other is the dark side of being "nice." But the fact remains that, absent a rule that says otherwise, we are free to act without permission, keeping in mind that action has consequence for which we are responsible. This is not true for corporations. They do become corporate within a framework of statutory instruments and regulations and so their authority to act can be and often is circumscribed by the state in many ways, particularly with respect to primary purpose. I mention this because I want to introduce an aspect of accountability that nation states do not usually include in their authorization of incorporation. This is an aspect of accountability that is also absent from discussions of Internet Governance. This the obligation of decision-makers in corporations (and in governments, and in the decision makers in the Internet Governance ecosystem) to explain their intentions and reasons publicly, fully and fairly. BEFORE THEY ACT. It is a responsibility of corporate management to provide adequate public explanation before the fact that they have addressed both the issue of the prevention of harm and the impact question of who benefits and who pays. They are not free to act first and seek forgiveness later. True, we do't demand or legislate they they do this, but we could and should. Explanation before the fact has certain benefits (public goods): - It reduces driving forces reasonably seen as harmful - It allows for an action to define in advance its own standard by which it's effectiveness and fairness can be measured after the fact. - It allows knowledgeable citizen organizations and individuals to sensibly and publicly challenge those intentions and reasons. For example, while ICANN does have an elaborate "community" process of challenge and response related to its policy intentions before the fact of deciding them, its internal discussions of accountability still only assume after the fact explanations of its actions. ICANN has achieved a degree of effective process of accountability before the fact without including that process in its contemplation of mechanisms of accountability. When you say, "Every person shall be free to use the Internet in any way that is privately beneficial without being publicly detrimental," that feels to me like another acceptable corollary of the Golden Rule. But then saying, "the burden of demonstrating public detriment (falls) on those who wish to prevent the private use," would seem to me to preclude the resolution of the impact question of who benefits and who pays before the fact of action. Who benefits and who pays if we do that? GG On 2014-04-03, at 8:47 PM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > Almost any given thing is a blend of useful/good and bad - rights to > benefit from that thing in some way and obligations that arise. (We > often tend to overlook those obligations.) > > Sometimes those benefits accrue to - and obligations fall upon - each > individual person equally or upon all of us as a community. I would > suggest that those kinds of things are "public" values. > > Other times those benefits and obligations are more focused on a single > identifiable person (a natural human or a legal creation such as a > corporation). I would suggest that those kind of things are "private" > values. > > When we talk about private property we tend to mean things that land > mostly in that latter category, but still (we hope) remember that even > the most private of things tends to be subject to the public in some way > (often in some way that occurs more as an exception rather than the norm.) > > So the problem I've wrestled with is what kind of principles can we use > to balance those public interests with the private ones. > > Here's what I came up with: > > 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. > > I have found this useful. However, it represents a balance between "me" > and "we" that tends to favor the former over the latter. That may be a > balance that reflects my US/Canadian roots. It would not surprise me to > learn that people from other cultures would strike a different balance. > > To my mind, finding these kinds of statements of principle would be > useful to help us navigate our way through the maze of choices that we > have to make as we figure out how to govern - or not govern - various > aspects of the internet. -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From remmyn at gmail.com Fri Apr 4 15:21:27 2014 From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 20:21:27 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF Assessments Call for information In-Reply-To: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> References: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> Message-ID: thanks, seen On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Dear all this is important. Compiled responses would be good if possible. > > Anriette > > > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IGFmaglist] Call for > information Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:07:12 +0300 From: Janis Karklins > To: > igfmaglist at intgovforum.org > > Dear MAG members, > As we discussed during the last conference call pls see the call for > information concerning the concrete actions and decisions that have been > taken as a result of the engagement at the various IGFs. > Pls disseminate this call as wide as possible and encourage organization > provide a brief account. > Thank you > JK > > > > The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the > Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on Internet > governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide a platform > for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and possible > solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify and > disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions. > > > > Over the past few years, some critics of the IGF have suggested that no > actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that > it is just a "talk shop". > > > > In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" of the > IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and > decisions that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the > engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs(international, regional or national). > > > > In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and > institutions that would be willing to share information, *on a voluntary > basis*, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a > result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 > and 2013 IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGFSecretariat (insert the e-mail address) by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat > will compile all information received and will present a synthesized report > at the Istanbul IGF. > > > > Thank you for your participation > > > > Janis Karklins > > Interim Chair of the MAG > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > -- REMMY NWEKE, Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor, DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd (publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News; ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet (Multiple-award winning medium) Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475, T: @ITRealms [Member, NIRA Executive Board] Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2014< http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5 Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2014 - June 6 @Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com _____________________________________________________________________ *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make any copies. Violators may face court persecution. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Fri Apr 4 15:46:54 2014 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 12:46:54 -0700 Subject: [governance] DNS [Property or Public Good] In-Reply-To: <975F2E9D-B4F6-4ED3-82E2-E9AD06A1AC42@telus.net> References: <53362153.7040806@cavebear.com> <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> <533E2B66.2060109@cavebear.com> <975F2E9D-B4F6-4ED3-82E2-E9AD06A1AC42@telus.net> Message-ID: <533F0C2E.6020208@cavebear.com> On 04/04/2014 11:40 AM, Garth Graham wrote: > While I admire the clarity of your first law, it feels to me that, when you define the corporate as a person... I'd be among the last to want to assert that corporate forms are persons. ;-) Take a look at http://cavebear.com/amendment/ But in the context of my "first law" formulation, I accept that corporations are things that use the internet and that they should have some ability parallel to that of natural humans to have private interests and use the internet to advance those private interests - as long as there is not a strong, concrete public interest to the contrary. You mentioned measuring the benefits in advance of action. I don't see how that can work, particularly on the internet where it is difficult to foresee benefits and malafits (that's a word I made up to mean the opposite of a benefit). Indeed, back in the late 1960's when the ideas of packet switching were bouncing around (pun intended) the circuit switching telcos were very actively trying to suppress those ideas by claiming that they would damage the circuit switched universe. Had it been necessary to make a prediction at that time of the value of packet switching we might never had had an IP based internet. It is also interesting to look at the Hush-A-Phone case from which I derived much of the original notion of the "first law" that I formulated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hush-A-Phone_v._United_States --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 garth.graham at telus.net Fri Apr 4 16:30:44 2014 From: garth.graham at telus.net (Garth Graham) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 13:30:44 -0700 Subject: [governance] DNS [Property or Public Good] In-Reply-To: <533F0C2E.6020208@cavebear.com> References: <53362153.7040806@cavebear.com> <53369CDF.9090405@wzb.eu> <533E2B66.2060109@cavebear.com> <975F2E9D-B4F6-4ED3-82E2-E9AD06A1AC42@telus.net> <533F0C2E.6020208@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <7DE545EA-E82E-484C-8553-93677088B010@telus.net> On 2014-04-04, at 12:46 PM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > You mentioned measuring the benefits in advance of action. I don't see how that can work, particularly on the internet where it is difficult to foresee benefits and malafits (that's a word I made up to mean the opposite of a benefit). Not quite. I mentioned that explanation before the fact … allows for an action to define in advance its own standard by which it's effectiveness and fairness can be measured after the fact. GG -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From soekpe at gmail.com Fri Apr 4 18:22:41 2014 From: soekpe at gmail.com (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 23:22:41 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF Assessments Call for information In-Reply-To: References: <533A8789.20407@apc.org> Message-ID: Discussions lead to decisions and actions. Sonigitu Ekpe Mobile +234 805 0232 469 Office + 234 802 751 0179 "LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving" On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:21 PM, Remmy Nweke wrote: > thanks, seen > > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > >> Dear all this is important. Compiled responses would be good if >> possible. >> >> Anriette >> >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IGFmaglist] Call for >> information Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:07:12 +0300 From: Janis Karklins >> To: >> igfmaglist at intgovforum.org >> >> Dear MAG members, >> As we discussed during the last conference call pls see the call for >> information concerning the concrete actions and decisions that have been >> taken as a result of the engagement at the various IGFs. >> Pls disseminate this call as wide as possible and encourage organization >> provide a brief account. >> Thank you >> JK >> >> >> >> The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the >> Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on >> Internet governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide >> a platform for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and >> possible solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify >> and disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions. >> >> >> >> Over the past few years, some critics of the IGF have suggested that no >> actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that >> it is just a "talk shop". >> >> >> >> In order to dissipate those doubts about the "action orientation" of the >> IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and >> decisions that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the >> engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs(international, regional or national). >> >> >> >> In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and >> institutions that would be willing to share information, *on a voluntary >> basis*, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a >> result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, >> 2012 and 2013 IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGFSecretariat (insert the e-mail address) by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat >> will compile all information received and will present a synthesized report >> at the Istanbul IGF. >> >> >> >> Thank you for your participation >> >> >> >> Janis Karklins >> >> Interim Chair of the MAG >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >> >> > > > -- > REMMY NWEKE, > Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor, > DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd > (publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News; > ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet > (Multiple-award winning medium) > Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd > Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza > Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos > M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475, > T: @ITRealms > [Member, NIRA Executive Board] > Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria > NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2014< > http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5 > Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2014 - June 6 > @Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com > _____________________________________________________________________ > *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments > are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended > only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal > responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the > intended > recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do > not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make > any copies. Violators may face court persecution. > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Fri Apr 4 18:45:21 2014 From: dvbirve at yandex.ru (Shcherbovich Andrey) Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 02:45:21 +0400 Subject: [governance] Workshop on 'Big Data and Human Rights' Message-ID: <5666551396651521@web23m.yandex.ru> Dear Colleagues! The Higher School of Economics is planning to organize a workshop on 'Big Data & Human Rights' on the 9th Session of the Internet Governance Forum in Istanbul and we are looking for colleagues who will be interested in this topic and who could possibly join us at the workshop onsite or remotely. Sincerely yours, Andrey Shcherbovich -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 4 19:59:48 2014 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 11:59:48 +1200 Subject: [governance] Workshop on 'Big Data and Human Rights' In-Reply-To: <5666551396651521@web23m.yandex.ru> References: <5666551396651521@web23m.yandex.ru> Message-ID: Andrey wondering whether you would be interested in inviting a perspective from the World Bank and can hook you up witb their Big Data specialist. Really awesome that you are organising a ws in this. Sala On 5 Apr 2014 10:45, "Shcherbovich Andrey" wrote: > Dear Colleagues! > > The Higher School of Economics is planning to organize a workshop on 'Big > Data & Human Rights' on the 9th Session of the Internet Governance Forum in > Istanbul and we are looking for colleagues who will be interested in this > topic and who could possibly join us at the workshop onsite or remotely. > > Sincerely yours, > Andrey Shcherbovich > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Sat Apr 5 00:14:16 2014 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 00:14:16 -0400 Subject: [governance] Workshop on 'Big Data and Human Rights' In-Reply-To: <5666551396651521@web23m.yandex.ru> References: <5666551396651521@web23m.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <0534C0AA-DBF9-40A5-AB79-D4EA4FC78C49@mail.utoronto.ca> I am very interested in this topic, on the data protection side, and am writing about it. I have not figured out how to get funding for the Istanbul conference as yet, but would gladly join the workshop either in person or remotely. Stephanie Perrin Canada On 2014-04-04, at 6:45 PM, Shcherbovich Andrey wrote: > Dear Colleagues! > > The Higher School of Economics is planning to organize a workshop on 'Big Data & Human Rights' on the 9th Session of the Internet Governance Forum in Istanbul and we are looking for colleagues who will be interested in this topic and who could possibly join us at the workshop onsite or remotely. > > Sincerely yours, > Andrey Shcherbovich > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Apr 5 05:38:09 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:08:09 +0530 Subject: [governance] NetMundial funding - information requested Message-ID: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> Someone who is not in these civil society circles, and who had sought funding support on registering for NetMundial, asked me information about how funding support works. Since I am not able to help that person with this information, may I request those involved with the meeting to provide it. Please note that this is urgent. (The concerned person has received an email from ICANN informing him that ICANN would support her/his travel for the meeting.) It will be useful to know full details about how the funding process worked. Was there a pool of donations? Who picked up the participants who were offered funding? What kind of criteria was used? Why individual funders are approaching participants with funding support, and why a centralised approach from the meeting organisers was not made/ considered? Whether there are other funders too making such a direct approach? Who are the funders and what amounts have been committed? If say an Internet company was to approach a civil society participant declaring that it will fund her/ his travel, it could create a potential problem because many civil society groups have limitations on what kind of funding for travel etc they can accept from private companies, especially those who work in their own activity area , and under what conditions. I request early information on the above since the person who has asked for this information and her/his organisation needs to make an early decision about accepting the funding, given the short period to the meeting. Thanks parminder PS: It is not a personal gripe because two persons from IT for Change have been offered support in a similar way and we have accepted it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 5 06:27:55 2014 From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 12:27:55 +0200 Subject: [governance] NetMundial funding - information requested In-Reply-To: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hello Parminder, the process was as follows: 1.Registration online NetMundial; in the online form, it was asked, among other things if candidate needed a partial or total load; 1.2 Once registration is approved, secretrariat of NetMundial has notified candidates.; 3.Secretariat has NetMundial then sent a link to the visa application; 4.It is at this stage that the secretariat requires the booking of hotel by applicant and receives information about support for the stay in Sao Paolo during the summit. 4. it is also at this stage that the secretariat sent a form for resrevation flight. It is also at this time that the travel ICANN constituency contacted the candidate. So, the whole process of funding support is coordinated and managed by NetMundial secretariat. 2014-04-05 11:38 GMT+02:00 parminder : > Someone who is not in these civil society circles, and who had sought > funding support on registering for NetMundial, asked me information about > how funding support works. Since I am not able to help that person with > this information, may I request those involved with the meeting to provide > it. Please note that this is urgent. (The concerned person has received an > email from ICANN informing him that ICANN would support her/his travel for > the meeting.) > > It will be useful to know full details about how the funding process > worked. Was there a pool of donations? Who picked up the participants who > were offered funding? What kind of criteria was used? Why individual > funders are approaching participants with funding support, and why a > centralised approach from the meeting organisers was not made/ considered? > Whether there are other funders too making such a direct approach? Who are > the funders and what amounts have been committed? > > If say an Internet company was to approach a civil society participant > declaring that it will fund her/ his travel, it could create a potential > problem because many civil society groups have limitations on what kind of > funding for travel etc they can accept from private companies, especially > those who work in their own activity area , and under what conditions. > > I request early information on the above since the person who has asked > for this information and her/his organisation needs to make an early > decision about accepting the funding, given the short period to the meeting. > > Thanks > > parminder > > PS: It is not a personal gripe because two persons from IT for Change have > been offered support in a similar way and we have accepted it. > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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* *REPRESENTANT OFFICIEL TICAFRICA ET CYBERVILLAGE at FRICA/RDC* *COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFECCOORDINATION NATIONALE REPRONTIC* Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512 email : b.schombe at gmail.com skype : b.schombe 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 Apr 5 06:38:54 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 16:08:54 +0530 Subject: [governance] NetMundial funding - information requested In-Reply-To: References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <533FDD3E.4010502@itforchange.net> On Saturday 05 April 2014 03:57 PM, Baudouin Schombe wrote: > Hello Parminder, > > the process was as follows: > > 1.Registration online NetMundial; in the online form, it was asked, > among other things if candidate needed a partial or total load; > 1.2 Once registration is approved, secretrariat of NetMundial has > notified candidates.; > 3.Secretariat has NetMundial then sent a link to the visa application; > 4.It is at this stage that the secretariat requires the booking of > hotel by applicant and receives information about support for the > stay in Sao Paolo during the summit. > 4. it is also at this stage that the secretariat sent a form for > resrevation flight. It is also at this time that the travel ICANN > constituency contacted the candidate. Thanks Baudouin, This is the set of information available at the participant end, which I already know, and also the person who originally sought the information. We would like to get some information at the other end, not know to us, which is contained in my questions. > > So, the whole process of funding support is coordinated and managed by > NetMundial secretariat. The mail from travel-ICANN-constituency says 'ICANN is supporting your travel' and not that 'NetMundial is supporting your travel'... parminder > > > 2014-04-05 11:38 GMT+02:00 parminder >: > > Someone who is not in these civil society circles, and who had > sought funding support on registering for NetMundial, asked me > information about how funding support works. Since I am not able > to help that person with this information, may I request those > involved with the meeting to provide it. Please note that this is > urgent. (The concerned person has received an email from ICANN > informing him that ICANN would support her/his travel for the > meeting.) > > It will be useful to know full details about how the funding > process worked. Was there a pool of donations? Who picked up the > participants who were offered funding? What kind of criteria was > used? Why individual funders are approaching participants with > funding support, and why a centralised approach from the meeting > organisers was not made/ considered? Whether there are other > funders too making such a direct approach? Who are the funders and > what amounts have been committed? > > If say an Internet company was to approach a civil society > participant declaring that it will fund her/ his travel, it could > create a potential problem because many civil society groups have > limitations on what kind of funding for travel etc they can accept > from private companies, especially those who work in their own > activity area , and under what conditions. > > I request early information on the above since the person who has > asked for this information and her/his organisation needs to make > an early decision about accepting the funding, given the short > period to the meeting. > > Thanks > > parminder > > PS: It is not a personal gripe because two persons from IT for > Change have been offered support in a similar way and we have > accepted it. > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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* > *REPRESENTANT OFFICIEL TICAFRICA ET CYBERVILLAGE at FRICA/RDC* > *COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFEC > COORDINATION NATIONALE REPRONTIC* > * > *Téléphone mobile:+243998983491 /+243813684512 > > email : b.schombe at gmail.com > skype : b.schombe > 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 baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Sat Apr 5 06:58:57 2014 From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 12:58:57 +0200 Subject: [governance] NetMundial funding - information requested In-Reply-To: <533FDD3E.4010502@itforchange.net> References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> <533FDD3E.4010502@itforchange.net> Message-ID: The mail from travel-ICANN-constituency says 'ICANN is supporting your travel' and not that 'NetMundial is supporting your travel'... exactly Parminder, but contact with sponsors is managed by NetMundial Secretariat. I could be wrong. 2014-04-05 12:38 GMT+02:00 parminder : > > On Saturday 05 April 2014 03:57 PM, Baudouin Schombe wrote: > > Hello Parminder, > > the process was as follows: > > 1.Registration online NetMundial; in the online form, it was asked, > among other things if candidate needed a partial or total load; > 1.2 Once registration is approved, secretrariat of NetMundial has > notified candidates.; > 3.Secretariat has NetMundial then sent a link to the visa application; > 4.It is at this stage that the secretariat requires the booking of hotel > by applicant and receives information about support for the stay in Sao > Paolo during the summit. > 4. it is also at this stage that the secretariat sent a form for > resrevation flight. It is also at this time that the travel ICANN > constituency contacted the candidate. > > > Thanks Baudouin, This is the set of information available at the > participant end, which I already know, and also the person who originally > sought the information. We would like to get some information at the other > end, not know to us, which is contained in my questions. > > > > So, the whole process of funding support is coordinated and managed by > NetMundial secretariat. > > > The mail from travel-ICANN-constituency says 'ICANN is supporting your > travel' and not that 'NetMundial is supporting your travel'... > > parminder > > > > 2014-04-05 11:38 GMT+02:00 parminder : > >> Someone who is not in these civil society circles, and who had sought >> funding support on registering for NetMundial, asked me information about >> how funding support works. Since I am not able to help that person with >> this information, may I request those involved with the meeting to provide >> it. Please note that this is urgent. (The concerned person has received an >> email from ICANN informing him that ICANN would support her/his travel for >> the meeting.) >> >> It will be useful to know full details about how the funding process >> worked. Was there a pool of donations? Who picked up the participants who >> were offered funding? What kind of criteria was used? Why individual >> funders are approaching participants with funding support, and why a >> centralised approach from the meeting organisers was not made/ considered? >> Whether there are other funders too making such a direct approach? Who are >> the funders and what amounts have been committed? >> >> If say an Internet company was to approach a civil society participant >> declaring that it will fund her/ his travel, it could create a potential >> problem because many civil society groups have limitations on what kind of >> funding for travel etc they can accept from private companies, especially >> those who work in their own activity area , and under what conditions. >> >> I request early information on the above since the person who has asked >> for this information and her/his organisation needs to make an early >> decision about accepting the funding, given the short period to the meeting. >> >> Thanks >> >> parminder >> >> PS: It is not a personal gripe because two persons from IT for Change >> have been offered support in a similar way and we have accepted it. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To 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* > *REPRESENTANT OFFICIEL TICAFRICA ET CYBERVILLAGE at FRICA/RDC* > > *COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFEC COORDINATION NATIONALE REPRONTIC* > > Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512 > email : b.schombe at gmail.com > skype : b.schombe > blog : http://akimambo.unblog.fr > > > > -- *SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN* *REPRESENTANT OFFICIEL TICAFRICA ET CYBERVILLAGE at FRICA/RDC* *COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFECCOORDINATION NATIONALE REPRONTIC* Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512 email : b.schombe at gmail.com skype : b.schombe 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 wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Sat Apr 5 07:22:08 2014 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 13:22:08 +0200 Subject: [governance] Regional Networks and Global Trade References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> <533FDD3E.4010502@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642171@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> FYI http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2013-14%20-1377Report-final.pdf 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 dl at panamo.eu Sat Apr 5 07:35:32 2014 From: dl at panamo.eu (Dominique Lacroix) Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 13:35:32 +0200 Subject: [governance] Regional Networks and Global Trade In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642171@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> <533FDD3E.4010502@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642171@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <533FEA84.9020101@panamo.eu> Thanks Wolfgang. Very interesting. p.5 "/and has called for revocation of the U.S.-EU “Safe Harbor” Framework, which has provided a practical mechanism for both U.S companies and their business partners in Europe to export data to the United States, while adhering to EU privacy requirements./" I was told that the U.S.-EU “Safe Harbor” Framework was not very efficient. Was it ? @+, best regards, Dominique Le 05/04/14 13:22, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" a écrit : > FYI > > http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2013-14%20-1377Report-final.pdf > > 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 lorena at collaboratory.de Sat Apr 5 08:11:43 2014 From: lorena at collaboratory.de (Lorena Jaume-Palasi) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 14:11:43 +0200 Subject: [governance] Regional Networks and Global Trade In-Reply-To: <533FEA84.9020101@panamo.eu> References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> <533FDD3E.4010502@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642171@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <533FEA84.9020101@panamo.eu> Message-ID: Hi Dominique, Safe Harbor was not very efficient, indeed. There were many defficiencies with regard to enforcement and judicial remedies. Since the registration was outside the EU it could not be controlled by the EU, nobody had really an overview whether the rules were being implemented or not. Therefore Germany proposed to bild a robust framework for mechanisms like Safe Harbor within the new EU regulation (which is a good idea in my opinion). However a concrete proposal is still on work and has to be discussed in the Council. Kind regards, Lorena 2014-04-05 13:35 GMT+02:00 Dominique Lacroix
: > Thanks Wolfgang. Very interesting. > > p.5 "*and has called for revocation of the U.S.-EU "Safe Harbor" > Framework, which has provided a practical mechanism for both U.S companies > and their business partners in Europe to export data to the United States, > while adhering to EU privacy requirements.*" > > I was told that the U.S.-EU "Safe Harbor" Framework was not very > efficient. Was it ? > > @+, best regards, Dominique > > > Le 05/04/14 13:22, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" a écrit : > > FYI > http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2013-14%20-1377Report-final.pdf > > 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 > > -- Lorena Jaume-Palasí, M.A. * Coordinator of the Global Internet Governance (GIG) Ohu Internet & Gesellschaft Co:llaboratory e.V. www.collaboratory.de * Newsletter * Facebook * Twitter * Youtube -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 ec.europa.eu Sat Apr 5 09:16:43 2014 From: Camino.MANJON at ec.europa.eu (Camino.MANJON at ec.europa.eu) Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 13:16:43 +0000 Subject: [governance] Regional Networks and Global Trade In-Reply-To: References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> <533FDD3E.4010502@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642171@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <533FEA84.9020101@panamo.eu>, Message-ID: Hello, Also, in November last year (27.11.2013) the EU published a Communication and a package names "Restoring trust in EU-US data flows" (http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/com_2013_846_en.pdf) and that addresses the Safe Harbour, coupled with a second Communication on the functioning of the Safe Harbour from the perspective of EU Citizens and Companies established in the EU (http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/com_2013_847_en.pdf) "Making Safe Harbour safer: the Commission today made 13 recommendations to improve the functioning of the Safe Harbour scheme, after an analysis also published today finds the functioning of the scheme deficient in several respects. Remedies should be identified by summer 2014. The Commission will then review the functioning of the scheme based on the implementation of these 13 recommendations." Here is the press release http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1166_en.htm This is a MEMO containing a section on Safe Harbor http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-1059_en.htm These are the concrete changes to the Safe Harbor: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/privacy/thridcountries/adequacy-faq1_en.htm Best Camino From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Lorena Jaume-Palasi [lorena at collaboratory.de] Sent: 05 April 2014 14:11 To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dominique Lacroix Subject: Re: [governance] Regional Networks and Global Trade Hi Dominique, Safe Harbor was not very efficient, indeed. There were many defficiencies with regard to enforcement and judicial remedies. Since the registration was outside the EU it could not be controlled by the EU, nobody had really an overview whether the rules were being implemented or not. Therefore Germany proposed to bild a robust framework for mechanisms like Safe Harbor within the new EU regulation (which is a good idea in my opinion). However a concrete proposal is still on work and has to be discussed in the Council. Kind regards, Lorena 2014-04-05 13:35 GMT+02:00 Dominique Lacroix
>: Thanks Wolfgang. Very interesting. p.5 "and has called for revocation of the U.S.-EU “Safe Harbor” Framework, which has provided a practical mechanism for both U.S companies and their business partners in Europe to export data to the United States, while adhering to EU privacy requirements." I was told that the U.S.-EU “Safe Harbor” Framework was not very efficient. Was it ? @+, best regards, Dominique Le 05/04/14 13:22, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" a écrit : FYI http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2013-14%20-1377Report-final.pdf 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 -- Lorena Jaume-Palasí, M.A. ∙ Coordinator of the Global Internet Governance (GIG) Ohu Internet & Gesellschaft Co:llaboratory e.V. Twitter ∙ Youtube -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From mariliamaciel at gmail.com Sun Apr 6 08:50:08 2014 From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel) Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2014 09:50:08 -0300 Subject: [governance] NetMundial funding - information requested In-Reply-To: References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> <533FDD3E.4010502@itforchange.net> Message-ID: I am currently in transit and unable to write detailed messages. Can get back later. There was no support for traveling until icann 49. Cgi. Br secured funding for committee members only. Recently, joint efforts managed to make some funding available. I am not sure which organizations participated in the pool. It seems icann constituency travel is helping with emissions due to their expertise and little time available. The EMC was not involved with funding issues. Marilia Em 05/04/2014 07:59, "Baudouin Schombe" escreveu: > The mail from travel-ICANN-constituency says 'ICANN is supporting your > travel' and not that 'NetMundial is supporting your travel'... > > > exactly Parminder, but contact with sponsors is managed by NetMundial > Secretariat. I could be wrong. > > > 2014-04-05 12:38 GMT+02:00 parminder : > >> >> On Saturday 05 April 2014 03:57 PM, Baudouin Schombe wrote: >> >> Hello Parminder, >> >> the process was as follows: >> >> 1.Registration online NetMundial; in the online form, it was asked, >> among other things if candidate needed a partial or total load; >> 1.2 Once registration is approved, secretrariat of NetMundial has >> notified candidates.; >> 3.Secretariat has NetMundial then sent a link to the visa application; >> 4.It is at this stage that the secretariat requires the booking of hotel >> by applicant and receives information about support for the stay in Sao >> Paolo during the summit. >> 4. it is also at this stage that the secretariat sent a form for >> resrevation flight. It is also at this time that the travel ICANN >> constituency contacted the candidate. >> >> >> Thanks Baudouin, This is the set of information available at the >> participant end, which I already know, and also the person who originally >> sought the information. We would like to get some information at the other >> end, not know to us, which is contained in my questions. >> >> >> >> So, the whole process of funding support is coordinated and managed by >> NetMundial secretariat. >> >> >> The mail from travel-ICANN-constituency says 'ICANN is supporting your >> travel' and not that 'NetMundial is supporting your travel'... >> >> parminder >> >> >> >> 2014-04-05 11:38 GMT+02:00 parminder : >> >>> Someone who is not in these civil society circles, and who had sought >>> funding support on registering for NetMundial, asked me information about >>> how funding support works. Since I am not able to help that person with >>> this information, may I request those involved with the meeting to provide >>> it. Please note that this is urgent. (The concerned person has received an >>> email from ICANN informing him that ICANN would support her/his travel for >>> the meeting.) >>> >>> It will be useful to know full details about how the funding process >>> worked. Was there a pool of donations? Who picked up the participants who >>> were offered funding? What kind of criteria was used? Why individual >>> funders are approaching participants with funding support, and why a >>> centralised approach from the meeting organisers was not made/ considered? >>> Whether there are other funders too making such a direct approach? Who are >>> the funders and what amounts have been committed? >>> >>> If say an Internet company was to approach a civil society participant >>> declaring that it will fund her/ his travel, it could create a potential >>> problem because many civil society groups have limitations on what kind of >>> funding for travel etc they can accept from private companies, especially >>> those who work in their own activity area , and under what conditions. >>> >>> I request early information on the above since the person who has asked >>> for this information and her/his organisation needs to make an early >>> decision about accepting the funding, given the short period to the meeting. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> PS: It is not a personal gripe because two persons from IT for Change >>> have been offered support in a similar way and we have accepted it. >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> To be removed from the list, visit: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >>> >>> For all other list information and functions, see: >>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>> To 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* >> *REPRESENTANT OFFICIEL TICAFRICA ET CYBERVILLAGE at FRICA/RDC* >> >> *COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFEC COORDINATION NATIONALE REPRONTIC* >> >> Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512 >> email : b.schombe at gmail.com >> skype : b.schombe >> blog : http://akimambo.unblog.fr >> >> >> >> > > > -- > *SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN* > *REPRESENTANT OFFICIEL TICAFRICA ET CYBERVILLAGE at FRICA/RDC* > > *COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFECCOORDINATION NATIONALE REPRONTIC* > > Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512 > email : b.schombe at gmail.com > skype : b.schombe > 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 fulvio.frati at unimi.it Mon Apr 7 08:32:22 2014 From: fulvio.frati at unimi.it (Fulvio Frati) Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 14:32:22 +0200 Subject: [governance] [SPE2014] Extended Submission Deadline Approaching: April 15, 2014 Message-ID: <00b901cf525d$6cf00860$46d01920$@unimi.it> [Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this message] ========================================================================== CALL FOR PAPERS IEEE 2014 Fourth International Workshop on Security and Privacy Engineering (SPE2014) One day between June 27 and July 2, 2014, at Hilton Anchorage, Alaska, USA Co-located with IEEE SERVICES 2014 (http://www.servicescongress.org/2014/) Workshop Web page: http://sesar.dti.unimi.it/SPE2014/ ========================================================================== ************************************************ ***** Submission Deadline Approaching: April 15, 2014 ***** ************************************************ =========== Description =========== Built upon the success of spectrum of conferences within the IEEE World Congress on Services, the Security and Privacy Engineering (SPE 2014) workshop is a unique place to exchange ideas of engineering secure systems in the context of service computing, cloud computing, and big data analytics. The emphasis on engineering in security and privacy of services differentiates the workshop from other traditional prestigious security and privacy workshops, symposiums, and conferences. The practicality and value realization are examined by practitioners from leading industries as well as scientists from academia. In line with the engineering spirit, we solicit original papers on building secure service systems that can be applied to government procurement, digital medical records, cloud environments, social networking for business purposes, multimedia application, mobile commerce, education, and the like. Potential contributions could cover, but are not limited to, methodologies, protocols, tools, or verification and validation techniques. We also welcome review papers that analyze critically the status of current Security and Privacy (S&P) in a specific area. Papers from practitioners who encounter security and privacy problems and seek understanding are also welcome. Topics of interests of SPE 2014 include, but are not limited to: - S&P Engineering of Service-Based Applications - Security Engineering of Service Compositions - Practical Approaches to Security Engineering of Services - Privacy-Aware Service Engineering - Industrial and Real Use Cases in S&P Engineering of (Cloud) Services - S&P Engineering of Cloud Services - Auditing and Assessment - Assurance and Certification - Security Management and Governance - Privacy Enforcement in Clouds and Services - Cybersecurity Issues of Clouds and Services - Validation and Verification of S&P in Clouds and Services - Applied Cryptography for S&P in Clouds and Services - S&P Testing in Clouds and Services - Security and Privacy Modeling - Socio-Economics and Compliance - Education and Awareness - Big Data S&P Engineering =============== Important Dates =============== Full Paper Submission Due Date (EXTENDED): April 15, 2014 Decision Notification (Electronic): April 22, 2014 Camera-Ready Copy Due Date & Pre-registration Due: May 1, 2014 ================ Paper Submission ================ Authors are invited to submit full papers (about 8 pages) or short papers (about 4 pages) as per IEEE 8.5 x 11 manuscript guidelines (download Word templates http://conferences.computer.org/icws/2014/IEEECS_CPS_8.5x11x2.zip or LaTeX templates http://conferences.computer.org/icws/2014/IEEECS_CPS_LaTeX_Letter_2Col.zip). The submitted papers can only be in the format of PDF or WORD. Please follow the IEEE Computer Society Press Proceedings Author Guidelines to prepare your papers, respectively. At least one author of each accepted paper is required to attend the workshop and present the paper. All papers must be submitted via the confhub submission system for the SPE workshop (http://www.confhub.com/conf.php?id=338). First time users need to register with the system first (see these instructions for details http://www.servicescongress.org/2014/submission.html). All the accepted papers by the workshops will be included in the Proceedings of the IEEE 10th World Congress on Services (SERVICES 2014) which will be published by IEEE Computer Society. =============== Workshop Chairs =============== - Claudio Agostino Ardagna, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy, claudio.ardagna-AT-unimi.it - Meiko Jensen, Independent Centre for Privacy Protection Schleswig-Holstein, Germany, Meiko.Jensen-AT-rub.de - Zhixiong Chen, Mercy College, NY, USA, zchen-AT-mercy.edu - Ernesto Damiani, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy, ernesto.damiani-AT-unimi.it ================= Program Committee ================= - Rafael Accorsi, University of Freiburg, Germany - Rasool Asal, British Telecommunications, UK - Jens-atthias Bohli, NEC Laboratories Europe, Germany - Bud Brügger, Fraunhofer IAO, Germany - Ali Chettih, Pivot Point Security, Mercy College NY, USA - Frances Cleary, Waterford Institute of Technology, Ireland - Quiang Duan, Penn State at Abington, USA - Massimo Felici, Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, USA - Christopher Frenz, CTO at See-Thru, USA - Atsuhiro Goto, Institute of Information Security, Japan - Nils Gruschka, University of Applied Sciences Kiel, Germany - Marit Hansen, Independent Centre for Privacy Protection Schleswig-Holstein, Germany, - Patrick Hung, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Canada - Luigi Lo Iacono, University of Applied Sciences Cologne, Germany - Florian Kerschbaum, SAP Research Karlsruhe, Germany - Zhiqiang Lin, UT Dallas, USA - Jörg Schwenk, Ruhr University Bochum, Germany - Wei Tan, IBM, USA - Jong Yoon, Mercy College, USA - Yingzhou Zhang, Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, China =============== Publicity Chair =============== - Fulvio Frati, Università degli studi di Milano, Italy More information available at http://sesar.dti.unimi.it/SPE2014/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From fulvio.frati at unimi.it Mon Apr 7 08:54:49 2014 From: fulvio.frati at unimi.it (Fulvio Frati) Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 14:54:49 +0200 Subject: [governance] 2014 IEEE International Workshop on Autonomic Cloud Cybersecurity (ACC 2014) Message-ID: <016e01cf5260$8f9999a0$aecccce0$@unimi.it> [Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this message] ============================================================================ ===== The 2014 IEEE International Workshop on Autonomic Cloud Cybersecurity (ACC 2014) http://sesar.dti.unimi.it/ACC2014 Part of the IEEE International Conference on Cloud and Autonomic Computing (CAC 2014) http://www.autonomic-conference.org ============================================================================ ===== =========== Description =========== Cloud computing services offer cost effective, scalable, and reliable outsourced platforms. Cloud adoption is becoming rapidly ubiquitous; therefore, private and sensitive data is being moved into the cloud. This move is introducing new security and privacy challenges, which should be diligently addressed in order to avoid severe security repercussions. The focus of this workshop is to offer a discussion forum about autonomous cybersecurity systems, which offer viable and well-suited solutions for cloud threat prediction, detection, mitigation, and prevention. The workshop is part of the IEEE International Conference on Cloud and Autonomic Computing (CAC 2014), and is collocated with The 8th IEEE Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing System Conference and The 14th IEEE Peer-to-Peer Computing Conference. We are soliciting original and unpublished results of ongoing research projects, emerging trends, uses cases, and implementation experiences in autonomous cloud cybersecurity systems and solutions. ================ Topics ================ The topics covered include, but are not limited to: - Self-protection techniques of computing systems, networks and applications. - Performance evaluation and metrics of self-protection algorithms. - Metrics to characterize and quantify the cybersecurity algorithms (confidentiality,integrity, and availability of autonomic systems) - Anomaly behavior analysis and discovery of autonomic systems and services. - Data mining, stochastic analysis and prediction of autonomic systems and applications. - Datasets and benchmarks to compare and evaluate different self-protection techniques. - Autonomic prediction of cyber crime. - Cloud cryptographic systems. - Autonomous cyber threat mitigation methods. - Cloud security protocols. - Automated cloud security analysis. - Cloud cybersecurity tools. ================== Paper Submission ================== Paper submission Papers submitted should be in the form of a two-page extended abstract. Manuscript preparation and style should follow the official IEEE proceedings format instructions. Papers should be submitted using the workshop submission page (https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=acc2014). ================== Deadlines ================== - Paper submission: May 7, 2014 - Author notification: June 12, 2014 - Camera-ready paper: July 3, 2014 - Workshop: September 8, 2014 ===================== Organizing Committee ===================== General Chair: - Ernesto Damiani, Universita' degli Studi di Milano, Italy Co-Chairs: - Anas Salah Eddin, Florida Polytechnic University, USA - George Spanoudakis, City University London, UK Steering Committee: - John Howie (Chair), Cloud Security Alliance, USA - Salim Hariri, University of Arizona, USA - Bill Buchanan, Edinburgh Napier University, UK - Mohand-Said Hacid, Université Lyon 1, France -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 7 09:08:03 2014 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 22:08:03 +0900 Subject: [governance] IGF to be evaluated Message-ID: Some of you may already know, but just found this accidentally. Interesting. izumi Vacancy: Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Project Evaluator DMB is soliciting applications for an Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Project Evaluator. Please contact Eleonora Mazzucchi(mazzucchi at un.org) COB 11 April 2014. To see the Terms of Reference, please click here. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From shawna at apc.org Mon Apr 7 11:58:22 2014 From: shawna at apc.org (Shawna Finnegan) Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 10:58:22 -0500 Subject: [governance] A Global Conversation for a Feminist Internet Message-ID: <5342CB1E.9@apc.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dear all, (Apologies for cross-posting) APC's 'Take Back The Tech' campaign is hosting a global conversation this week about how you imagine a feminist internet. These conversations will input to an evolving framework of Feminist Principles of the Internet to be developed at a global meeting on Gender, Sexuality and the Internet that will take place in Malaysia from this Friday, April 12th. You can join the conversation on Twitter, and/or reply to this message with your thoughts. *A Global Conversation for a Feminist Internet* Is a feminist internet possible? How has the internet shifted the way we understand power, politics, activism and agency? Join us in a global conversation on how the internet can strengthen and better facilitate feminist activism and what you think are key issues we need to engage with and interrogate to realise its transformative potential. How are we discussing the commodification of our bodies, behaviors, thoughts and data? How has the internet disrupted or reinforced capitalist frameworks? Is the internet enabling greater diversity of sexual expression or growing opportunities for the policing of sexuality? Do we rely too much on the internet for our work? Does activism 2.0 simply satisfy our need to "do something" without truly effecting change? Take part in the debate. Define and question what it takes to create a feminist internet. Join the conversation all week on Twitter. #imagineafeministinternet #takebackthetech @takebackthetech - -- Shawna Finnegan Human rights and the Internet Programme Worker Association for Progressive Communications @shawnafinnegan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJTQsseAAoJEAZqUsH4P1GKtMgL/j2Ygs6zmMH55PF9618Qn+et W5zVPwxyTbZKkinp/ooWnLVmVihRrSbBJhBfqmrJWzcAm0NAEwcxwZe/8xlRrwcS Oi0pAjqgPNzgICIo7yfOdqyvIzQJvpk31UWjMG2yay5/nN+ZVTPTuHoer7ccmZn+ ebFsYSboUfbuJFiALwx4TY3yv2mcCzt3JO2uwHSlahgUpvAUkChrLcyufqO330VC Af/KhI4TU4aGmNqztnTTTKigMUt94O10zT46Kd60/SjVL2m8uzOGYeinxlxJp5SD n0qelDEiLf1VamNVXnJp6QbfhniscHXICq6l+/QfRvWFdPlxZcI+442m0GbB8o2z h9phekNtitNpZV8wsH6aepWD/6yreGbNo4pGp0EKg755n4Iu5kvaFj/FD6B6U/Qt MrIBl8T/sY4PVPUcDcojfR++6bfj7LCgJJCEIBm34xqaCs1tIUtK6uAp0gwfzpDl M8jdSqITM13xTUAG1XPqtYpmARnOtrRhhzucfqG7/A== =LcWe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 7 19:09:09 2014 From: dvbirve at yandex.ru (Shcherbovich Andrey) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 03:09:09 +0400 Subject: [governance] Workshop on 'Big Data and Human Rights' In-Reply-To: References: <5666551396651521@web23m.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <1100271396912149@web19m.yandex.ru> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From ivissioninternational at yahoo.fr Tue Apr 8 06:49:58 2014 From: ivissioninternational at yahoo.fr (International Ivission) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 11:49:58 +0100 (BST) Subject: [governance] Workshop on 'Big Data and Human Rights' In-Reply-To: <1100271396912149@web19m.yandex.ru> References: <5666551396651521@web23m.yandex.ru> <1100271396912149@web19m.yandex.ru> Message-ID: <1396954198.34148.YahooMailNeo@web171306.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Dear colleagues, This topic is quite interesting! Kindly add me to the list of remote participants. How will remote participation be done? Hoping to hear from you. My regards,   ___________________________________ Asama Abel Excel President and CEO I-VISSION INTERNATIONAL 3rd Floor immeuble Centre Médical de Bessengué  Box 13040 Blvd de la rep., Feu Rouge Bessengué Douala Cameroon E: ivissioninternational at yahoo.fr / excelasama at yahoo.fr : info at ivission.net T (bur): +237 33 76 55 76  (Mob): 99 44 43 91 / 76 14 26 23Skype (office): i-vission (personal): excelasama, My blogWeb: www.ivission.net  Web album: www.flickr.com/ivission Facebook: ivission.internationl Twitter: www.twitter.com/ivission  NWK: www.meetup.com/ivission Le Mardi 8 avril 2014 1h10, Shcherbovich Andrey a écrit : Thank you, It would be great.   Thanks for your support, and you personally also invited to attend this workshop.   With kind regards, Andrey   05.04.2014, 04:00, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" : Andrey wondering whether you would be interested in inviting a perspective from the World Bank and can hook you up witb their Big Data specialist. >Really awesome that you are organising a ws in this. >Sala >On 5 Apr 2014 10:45, "Shcherbovich Andrey" wrote: > >Dear Colleagues! >> >>The Higher School of Economics is planning to organize a workshop on 'Big Data & Human Rights' on the 9th Session of the Internet Governance Forum in Istanbul  and we are looking for colleagues who will be interested in this topic and who could possibly join us at the workshop onsite or remotely. >> >>Sincerely yours, >>Andrey Shcherbovich >> >> >>____________________________________________________________ >>You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>To be removed from the list, visit: >>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >>For all other list information and functions, see: >>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>To 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     -- Отправлено из быстрой Яндекс.Почты http://mail.yandex.ru/neo2/collect/?exp=1&t=5   ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list:     governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit:     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see:     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To 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 Apr 8 08:54:11 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 08:54:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] Graphics from big data Message-ID: For those of us who find it easier to think visually, and also for those of us who don't. Thank you Carlton for sharing this on CIVIC. http://geography.oii.ox.ac.uk/?page=home Deirdre -- "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 pranesh at cis-india.org Tue Apr 8 11:56:47 2014 From: pranesh at cis-india.org (Pranesh Prakash) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 11:56:47 -0400 Subject: [governance] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document Message-ID: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> PDF link: http://goo.gl/z5bFXm https://wikileaks.org/netmundial-outcome/ NETmundial Executive Stakeholder Committee (EMC) Outcome Document Tuesday 8 April 2014, 15:30 GMT Today WikiLeaks released the penultimate draft agreement ("Outcome Document") going into NETmundial 2014 - the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance. NETmundial is an international conference of twelve nations and other internet stakeholders, to be hosted in São Paulo, Brazil, April 23-24, convened to lay down a roadmap for internet governance. It is co-hosted by the twelve goverments of Argentina, Brazil, France, Ghana, Germany, India, Indonesia, South Africa, South Korea, Tunisia, Turkey and the United States of America. The document was prepared by the NETmundial Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) from the 180 NETmundial submissions and has been submitted to the High Level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC) for final comment. The HLMC comprises ministerial level representation from the twelve co-hosting nations and is due to give its feedback tomorrow, on April 9. Outcome Document ---------------- This document has been created by the Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) and is submitted to the High-Level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC). Last Updated: April 3rd, 2014 ### **[0. Introduction](#introduction)** The Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance, also known as NETmundial, is convened to discuss two important issues relevant for the future evolution of the Internet, in an open and Multistakeholder fashion: - Internet Governance Principles, and - Roadmap for the future evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem The recommendations in this document have been prepared with the view to guiding NETmundial to consensus. This has been a collaborative effort among representatives of all stakeholder groups. More than 180 contributions have been received from all stakeholders around the globe. Those contributions have been taken as the basis for the elaboration of the recommendations here submitted to the participants of NETmundial towards the development of broad consensus. The recommendations of NETmundial are intended to constitute valuable contribution to be used in other Internet Governance related fora and entities. ### **[1. Internet Governance Principles Introduction.](#internet_governance_principles)** NETmundial identified a set of common principles and important values that may serve as the foundation for an inclusive, Multistakeholder, effective, legitimate, and evolving Internet Governance framework. Human Rights Principles related to Human Rights. Human rights are central values that should underpin Internet governance principles. Rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in accordance with international human rights law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Those rights include, but are not limited to: - Access to information and the free flow of information - Freedom of association - Freedom of expression: Everyone has the right to hold and express opinions, and to seek, receive, and impart information on the Internet without arbitrary interference. - Privacy: People should be able to exercise their right to privacy online the same way they do offline, including avoiding arbitrary or unlawful collection of personal data and surveillance. - Accessibility: People with disabilities should be granted full access to online resources. - Culture and linguistic diversity: Cultural and linguistic diversity should be encouraged and supported in a non-discriminatory manner. - Development: The Internet has a vital role to play in helping to achieve the full realization of internationally agreed sustainable development goals. ### **[Internet Infrastructure](#internet_infrastructure)** Principles related to the Internet infrastructure. To preserve an unfragmented, interconnected, interoperable, secure, stable, resilient, sustainable, and trustworthy Internet. SECURITY, STABILITY AND RESILIENCY Internet as an universal global resource, should remain a secure, stable, resilient and trustworthy network. Effectiveness in handling security depends on strong and constant cooperation among different stakeholders. - Security, stability, robustness and resilience of the Internet should be a key objective of all stakeholders in Internet governance. SINGLE AND UNFRAGMENTED SPACE The Internet should continue to be a globally coherent interconnected, unfragmented, scalable and accessible network which allows the free flow of data packets throughout the community, with: - A common set of unique identifiers - A stable and globally coherent Internet operations OPEN AND DISTRIBUTED ARCHITECTURE The Internet should be preserved as a fertile and innovative environment and an open system architecture, with voluntary collaboration, collective stewardship and participation, recognizing technical management principles for efficient and improved network operation and preserving: - End-to-end nature of the network - Equal treatment to all protocols and data, delivered by the underlying communications ENABLING ENVIRONMENT FOR INNOVATION The ability to innovate has been at the heart of the remarkable growth of the Internet and it brought great value to the global society. For the preservation of its dynamism, Internet must continue to allow permission-less innovation through an enabling environment. OPEN ACCESS/PLATFORM The Internet should be an open and accessible platform, promoting fair access to any content, applications and services at the user's choice. Internet should be a tool for equal opportunity and development, based on: - Minimal barriers: There should be no unreasonable barriers or unnecessary burdens to entry for new users - Universality: Access to the Internet should become universal as an effective tool for human development and social inclusion. - Agility: Policies for access to Internet service should be future oriented and technology neutral, able to accommodate rapidly developing technologies and different types of use. - Neutrality: The Internet should remain a neutral, free from discrimination, so as to encourage free expression, the free flow of information and ideas, creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship - Intermediary liability should be limited in line with international best practice - Diversity: The Internet must respect and promote diversity in all its forms ### **[Internet Governance Process](#internet_governance_process)** Principles related to Internet governance decision-making processes and arrangements. Internet governance should be open, participatory, Multistakeholder, technology-neutral, sensitive to human rights and based on principles of transparency, accountability and inclusiveness, among others: - Multistakeholder: with the full participation of governments, the private sector, civil society, the technical community, the academia and users in their respective roles and responsibilities. - Open, participatory, process driven governance: The development of international Internet-related public policies and Internet governance arrangements should enable full and balanced participation of all stakeholders from around the globe. - Transparent: it should be easy to understand how decisions are made, processes should be clearly documented and follow agreed procedures; procedures which should have been developed and agreed through Multistakeholder processes. - Accountable: mechanisms for checks and balances as well as for redress should exist. - Inclusive: Internet governance institutions and processes should be inclusive and open to all interested stakeholders. Processes should be bottom-up, enabling the full involvement of all stakeholders in a way does not disadvantage any category of stakeholder. - Distributed: A governance characterized by distributed and Multistakeholder mechanisms and organizations. - Collaborative: Internet governance should be based on and encourage collaborative and cooperative approaches to policy development that reflect the inputs and interests of stakeholders. - Enabling meaningful participation: All stakeholders should be able to participate in any internet governance process. Particularly, Internet governance institutions and processes should support capacity building for newcomers, especially stakeholders from developing countries and underrepresented groups. ### **[Standards](#standards)** Principles related to the technical standardization of the Internet OPEN STANDARDS The Internet should be unique, interoperable, resilient, decentralized, secure, interconnected, and based on open public standards, embracing: - Openness: allows for sharing and innovation, respecting rights and accessibility enabling global competition; - Interoperability: Open Standards facilitate interoperability and enable all to fully participate in the global network. - Stability: The open nature of the Internet allows its continued growth, resilience and stability. - Open development: Informed by individual and collective expertise and practical experience, decisions made by open consensus rather than voting. - Innovation: Open Standards serve as building blocks for further innovation and contribute to the creation of global communities. - Human rights: Standards must respect human rights contributing to the creation of global communities. - Availability: Open standards specifications on which the Internet is based should be made accessible to all for implementation and deployment. ### **[2. Roadmap for the future evolution of the Internet Governance](#roadmap)** ### **[I. Introduction](#roadmap_introduction)** The objective of this roadmap is to recommend the steps forward in the process of continuously improving the existing Internet governance framework ensuring full involvement of all stakeholders. Internet governance framework is a distributed and coordinated ecosystem involving various organizations and fora. It must be inclusive, transparent and accountable, and its structures and operations must follow a model that enable the participation of all stakeholders in order to address the interests of all those who benefit from the Internet. The implementation of the Tunis Agenda has demonstrated the value of the Multistakeholder model in Internet governance. The valuable contribution of all stakeholders to Internet governance should be recognized. Due to the successful experiences this model should be further strengthened, improved and evolved. Internet governance should serve as a catalyst for development and for promotion of human rights. Participation should reflect geographic balance and include stakeholders from developing and least developed countries. Issues that deserve attention of the community in the Internet governance future evolution. - Internet governance decisions are sometimes taken without the meaningful participation of all stakeholders. It is important that Multistakeholder decision-making and policy formulation are improved in order to ensure the full participation of all interested parties, recognizing the different roles played by different stakeholders. - Enhanced cooperation to address international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet must be fully implemented on a consensual basis. It is important that all stakeholders commit to advancing this discussion through the working group created to this purpose under UN CSTD and/or other international Multistakeholder dialogues. - Stakeholder representatives appointed to Multistakeholder Internet governance processes should be selected through open and transparent processes. Different stakeholder groups should self-manage their processes based on publicly known mechanisms. - There is a need to develop Multistakeholder mechanisms at the local level since a good portion of Internet governance issues should be tackled at this level. Local Multistakeholder mechanisms should serve as a link between local discussions and regional and global instances. Therefore a fluent coordination and dialogue across those different dimensions is essential. - There should be meaningful participation by all interested parties in Internet governance discussions and decision-making, with attention to geographic, stakeholder and gender balance in order to avoid asymmetries. - The establishment of enabling mechanisms including capacity building and empowerment mechanisms, such as remote participation or adequate funding, and access to meaningful and timely information are essential for promoting inclusive and effective Internet governance. - All stakeholders must renew their commitment to build a people centered, inclusive and development oriented Information Society. Therefore in pursuing the improvements of the Internet governance ecosystem, the focus on Digital Development Agenda should be retained. - Internet governance discussions would benefit from improved communication and coordination between technical and non-technical communities, providing a better understanding about the policy implications in technical decisions and technical implications in policy decision. ### **[Issues dealing with institutional improvements.](#issues_inst_improvements)** - There is a need for mechanisms to consider emerging topics and issues that are not currently being adequately addressed by existing Internet governance arrangements and usually referred as orphan issues. - There is a need for a strengthened Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Important recommendations to that end were made by the UN CSTD working group on IGF improvements. Improvements should include inter-alia: - Improved outcomes. Even keeping the nature of IGF as a non-decision-making body, improvements can be implemented including creative ways of providing outcomes/recommendations and the analysis of policy options. - Extending the IGF mandate beyond five-year terms, and considering the IGF as a permanent forum. - Ensuring guaranteed stable and predictable funding for the IGF is essential. - The IGF should adopt mechanisms to promote worldwide discussions between meetings. The 1Net initiative could possibly provide a platform for Multistakeholder intercessional dialogue. A strengthened IGF could better serve as a platform for discussing those orphans and emerging issues already mentioned in the previous point with a view to contributing to the identification of possible ways to address them. - There should be adequate communication and coordination among existing forums, task forces and organizations of the Internet governance ecosystem. Periodical reports, formal liaisons and timely feedbacks are examples of mechanisms that could be implemented to that end. It would be recommendable to analyze the option of creating Internet governance coordination mechanisms to perform on-going monitoring, analysis, and information-sharing functions. - In the follow up to the recent announcement of US Government with regard to its intent to transition the stewardship of IANA functions, the discussion about mechanisms for guaranteeing the transparency and accountability of those functions after the US Government role ends, has to take place through an open process with the participation of all stakeholders extending beyond the ICANN community. The IANA functions are currently performed under policies developed in processes hosted by several organizations and forums. Any adopted mechanism should protect the bottom up, open and participatory nature of those policy development processes and ensure the stability and resilience of the Internet. It is desirable to keep an adequate separation between the policy process and its operational aspects. This transition should be completed by September 2015. - It is expected that the process of globalization of ICANN speeds up leading to a truly international and global organization with an independent status and clear accountability mechanisms that satisfy requirements from its own stakeholders and from the global community. The relevant, balanced, and active representation from all regions and stakeholders in the ICANN structure is a key issue in the process of a successful globalization. ### **[Issues dealing with specific Internet Governance topics](#issues_governance_topics)** ​1. Security and Stability - It is necessary to continue working pursuing international agreements on topics such jurisdiction, law enforcement assistance to promote cybersecurity and prevent cybercrime. Discussions about those frameworks should be held in a Multistakeholder manner. International agreements should include measures of restraining cyber weapons development and deployment. - Initiatives to improve cybersecurity and address security threats should involve collaboration among private sector, researchers, technical experts, governments and NGOs. There are stakeholders that still need to become more involved with cybersecurity, for example network operators and software developers. - There is room for new forums and initiatives, they should not duplicate, but to add to current structures. All stakeholders should aim to leverage from and improve these already existing cybersecurity organizations. The experience accumulated by several of them, for example the Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST) and Computer Incident Response Teams (CERTs/CSIRTs), demonstrates that, in order to be effective, any cybersecurity initiative depends on cooperation among different stakeholders, and it can't be achieved via a single organization or structure. ​2. Internet Surveillance ? Mass and arbitrary surveillance undermines trust in the Internet and trust in the Internet Governance ecosystem. Mass surveillance and contradicts some of the principles proposed in this document. Surveillance should be conducted in accordance with the ?Necessary and Proportionate? principles. More dialogue is needed on this topic at the international level using forums like IGF and the Human Rights Council aiming to develop a common understanding on all the related aspects. ​3. Capacity building - One of the key requirements for realization of Internet governance principles is ensuring that diverse stakeholders have not merely the opportunity for nominal participation, but in fact the formation and the resources for effective participation. Capacity building is important to support the emergence of true Multistakeholder communities, especially in those regions where the participation of some stakeholders group needs to be further strengthened. ### **[Points to be further discussed beyond NETmundial:](#points_further_disc)** Several contributions to NETmundial identified points that need further discussion and better understanding regarding the following: - Different roles and responsibilities of stakeholders on the Internet governance ecosystem, including the meaning and application of equal footing. - Jurisdiction issues and how they relate to Internet governance. - A principles based code of conduct and related indicators for the Internet governance ecosystem. ### **[Key messages](#key_messages)** The Internet governance ecosystem needs to continuously evolve as described above, strengthening the Multistakeholder model across the entire ecosystem. Capacity building is a crucial aspect to enhance the participation of all stakeholders in a meaningful way. The IGF should be strengthened. There are issues that are not being treated properly by existing Internet governance mechanisms. IGF is one of the venues for discussing ways to deal with those issues. It is expected that ICANN continues working in evolving the organization toward a more global organization with a balanced participation of all stakeholders. The US Government?s special role with regard to the IANA functions should end in a short term and the transition should be conducted in an open, participatory and responsible manner. All the organizations with responsibilities in Internet governance ecosystem have to develop principles for transparency, accountability and inclusiveness and implement them. All the organizations should prepare periodical reports on their progresses and status about these issues. Those reports should be made publicly available. Further discussion is required to reach consensus on the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders in Internet governance. All the organizations, forums and processes of the Internet Governance ecosystem are expected to commit to implementing, as well as explicitly adhere, to all the principles agreed in NETmundial. It is expected that the NETmundial findings and outcomes feed other processes and forums, such as WSIS+10, IGF and all Internet governance discussions held in different organizations and bodies at all levels. The follow up and future discussions of topics listed in this document should prompt the creation of expert groups, task forces or groups of facilitators convened by existing entities or bodies. They should present reports of their works in major Internet governance meetings. -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org ------------------- Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School M: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From nnenna75 at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 12:09:48 2014 From: nnenna75 at gmail.com (Nnenna Nwakanma) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 16:09:48 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document In-Reply-To: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> References: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> Message-ID: Still reading.. N On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > PDF link: http://goo.gl/z5bFXm > > https://wikileaks.org/netmundial-outcome/ > > NETmundial Executive Stakeholder Committee (EMC) Outcome Document > Tuesday 8 April 2014, 15:30 GMT > > Today WikiLeaks released the penultimate draft agreement ("Outcome > Document") going into NETmundial 2014 - the Global Multistakeholder Meeting > on the Future of Internet Governance. NETmundial is an international > conference of twelve nations and other internet stakeholders, to be hosted > in São Paulo, Brazil, April 23-24, convened to lay down a roadmap for > internet governance. It is co-hosted by the twelve goverments of Argentina, > Brazil, France, Ghana, Germany, India, Indonesia, South Africa, South > Korea, Tunisia, Turkey and the United States of America. The document was > prepared by the NETmundial Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) from > the 180 NETmundial submissions and has been submitted to the High Level > Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC) for final comment. The HLMC comprises > ministerial level representation from the twelve co-hosting nations and is > due to give its feedback tomorrow, on April 9. > > > > Outcome Document > ---------------- > > This document has been created by the Executive Multistakeholder Committee > (EMC) and is submitted to the High-Level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC). > > Last Updated: April 3rd, 2014 > > ### **[0. Introduction](#introduction)** > > The Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance, > also known as NETmundial, is convened to discuss two important issues > relevant for the future evolution of the Internet, in an open and > Multistakeholder fashion: > > - Internet Governance Principles, and > - Roadmap for the future evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem > > The recommendations in this document have been prepared with the view to > guiding NETmundial to consensus. This has been a collaborative effort among > representatives of all stakeholder groups. > > More than 180 contributions have been received from all stakeholders > around the globe. Those contributions have been taken as the basis for the > elaboration of the recommendations here submitted to the participants of > NETmundial towards the development of broad consensus. > > The recommendations of NETmundial are intended to constitute valuable > contribution to be used in other Internet Governance related fora and > entities. > > ### **[1. Internet Governance Principles Introduction.](#internet_ > governance_principles)** > > NETmundial identified a set of common principles and important values that > may serve as the foundation for an inclusive, Multistakeholder, effective, > legitimate, and evolving Internet Governance framework. Human Rights > > Principles related to Human Rights. > > Human rights are central values that should underpin Internet governance > principles. Rights that people have offline must also be protected online, > in accordance with international human rights law, including the Universal > Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants on Civil and > Political Rights and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Those rights > include, but are not limited to: > > - Access to information and the free flow of information > - Freedom of association > - Freedom of expression: Everyone has the right to hold and express > opinions, and to seek, receive, and impart information on the Internet > without arbitrary interference. > - Privacy: People should be able to exercise their right to privacy > online the same way they do offline, including avoiding arbitrary or > unlawful collection of personal data and surveillance. > - Accessibility: People with disabilities should be granted full access > to online resources. > - Culture and linguistic diversity: Cultural and linguistic diversity > should be encouraged and supported in a non-discriminatory manner. > - Development: The Internet has a vital role to play in helping to > achieve the full realization of internationally agreed sustainable > development goals. > > ### **[Internet Infrastructure](#internet_infrastructure)** > > Principles related to the Internet infrastructure. > > To preserve an unfragmented, interconnected, interoperable, secure, > stable, resilient, sustainable, and trustworthy Internet. > > SECURITY, STABILITY AND RESILIENCY > > Internet as an universal global resource, should remain a secure, stable, > resilient and trustworthy network. Effectiveness in handling security > depends on strong and constant cooperation among different stakeholders. > > - Security, stability, robustness and resilience of the Internet should > be a key objective of all stakeholders in Internet governance. > > SINGLE AND UNFRAGMENTED SPACE > > The Internet should continue to be a globally coherent interconnected, > unfragmented, scalable and accessible network which allows the free flow of > data packets throughout the community, with: > > - A common set of unique identifiers > - A stable and globally coherent Internet operations > > OPEN AND DISTRIBUTED ARCHITECTURE > > The Internet should be preserved as a fertile and innovative environment > and an open system architecture, with voluntary collaboration, collective > stewardship and participation, recognizing technical management principles > for efficient and improved network operation and preserving: > > - End-to-end nature of the network > - Equal treatment to all protocols and data, delivered by the underlying > communications > > ENABLING ENVIRONMENT FOR INNOVATION > > The ability to innovate has been at the heart of the remarkable growth of > the Internet and it brought great value to the global society. For the > preservation of its dynamism, Internet must continue to allow > permission-less innovation through an enabling environment. > > OPEN ACCESS/PLATFORM > > The Internet should be an open and accessible platform, promoting fair > access to any content, applications and services at the user's choice. > Internet should be a tool for equal opportunity and development, based on: > > - Minimal barriers: There should be no unreasonable barriers or > unnecessary burdens to entry for new users > - Universality: Access to the Internet should become universal as an > effective tool for human development and social inclusion. > - Agility: Policies for access to Internet service should be future > oriented and technology neutral, able to accommodate rapidly developing > technologies and different types of use. > - Neutrality: The Internet should remain a neutral, free from > discrimination, so as to encourage free expression, the free flow of > information and ideas, creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship > - Intermediary liability should be limited in line with international > best practice > - Diversity: The Internet must respect and promote diversity in all its > forms > > ### **[Internet Governance Process](#internet_governance_process)** > > Principles related to Internet governance decision-making processes and > arrangements. > > Internet governance should be open, participatory, Multistakeholder, > technology-neutral, sensitive to human rights and based on principles of > transparency, accountability and inclusiveness, among others: > > - Multistakeholder: with the full participation of governments, the > private sector, civil society, the technical community, the academia and > users in their respective roles and responsibilities. > - Open, participatory, process driven governance: The development of > international Internet-related public policies and Internet governance > arrangements should enable full and balanced participation of all > stakeholders from around the globe. > - Transparent: it should be easy to understand how decisions are made, > processes should be clearly documented and follow agreed procedures; > procedures which should have been developed and agreed through > Multistakeholder processes. > - Accountable: mechanisms for checks and balances as well as for redress > should exist. > - Inclusive: Internet governance institutions and processes should be > inclusive and open to all interested stakeholders. Processes should be > bottom-up, enabling the full involvement of all stakeholders in a way does > not disadvantage any category of stakeholder. > - Distributed: A governance characterized by distributed and > Multistakeholder mechanisms and organizations. > - Collaborative: Internet governance should be based on and encourage > collaborative and cooperative approaches to policy development that reflect > the inputs and interests of stakeholders. > - Enabling meaningful participation: All stakeholders should be able to > participate in any internet governance process. Particularly, Internet > governance institutions and processes should support capacity building for > newcomers, especially stakeholders from developing countries and > underrepresented groups. > > ### **[Standards](#standards)** > > Principles related to the technical standardization of the Internet > > OPEN STANDARDS > > The Internet should be unique, interoperable, resilient, decentralized, > secure, interconnected, and based on open public standards, embracing: > > - Openness: allows for sharing and innovation, respecting rights and > accessibility enabling global competition; > - Interoperability: Open Standards facilitate interoperability and > enable all to fully participate in the global network. > - Stability: The open nature of the Internet allows its continued > growth, resilience and stability. > - Open development: Informed by individual and collective expertise and > practical experience, decisions made by open consensus rather than voting. > - Innovation: Open Standards serve as building blocks for further > innovation and contribute to the creation of global communities. > - Human rights: Standards must respect human rights contributing to the > creation of global communities. > - Availability: Open standards specifications on which the Internet is > based should be made accessible to all for implementation and deployment. > > ### **[2. Roadmap for the future evolution of the Internet > Governance](#roadmap)** > > ### **[I. Introduction](#roadmap_introduction)** > > The objective of this roadmap is to recommend the steps forward in the > process of continuously improving the existing Internet governance > framework ensuring full involvement of all stakeholders. Internet > governance framework is a distributed and coordinated ecosystem involving > various organizations and fora. It must be inclusive, transparent and > accountable, and its structures and operations must follow a model that > enable the participation of all stakeholders in order to address the > interests of all those who benefit from the Internet. The implementation of > the Tunis Agenda has demonstrated the value of the Multistakeholder model > in Internet governance. The valuable contribution of all stakeholders to > Internet governance should be recognized. Due to the successful experiences > this model should be further strengthened, improved and evolved. Internet > governance should serve as a catalyst for development and for promotion of > human rights. Participation should reflect geographic balance and include > stakeholders from developing and least developed countries. > > Issues that deserve attention of the community in the Internet governance > future evolution. > > - Internet governance decisions are sometimes taken without the > meaningful participation of all stakeholders. It is important that > Multistakeholder decision-making and policy formulation are improved in > order to ensure the full participation of all interested parties, > recognizing the different roles played by different stakeholders. > - Enhanced cooperation to address international public policy issues > pertaining to the Internet must be fully implemented on a consensual basis. > It is important that all stakeholders commit to advancing this discussion > through the working group created to this purpose under UN CSTD and/or > other international Multistakeholder dialogues. > - Stakeholder representatives appointed to Multistakeholder Internet > governance processes should be selected through open and transparent > processes. Different stakeholder groups should self-manage their processes > based on publicly known mechanisms. > - There is a need to develop Multistakeholder mechanisms at the local > level since a good portion of Internet governance issues should be tackled > at this level. Local Multistakeholder mechanisms should serve as a link > between local discussions and regional and global instances. Therefore a > fluent coordination and dialogue across those different dimensions is > essential. > - There should be meaningful participation by all interested parties in > Internet governance discussions and decision-making, with attention to > geographic, stakeholder and gender balance in order to avoid asymmetries. > - The establishment of enabling mechanisms including capacity building > and empowerment mechanisms, such as remote participation or adequate > funding, and access to meaningful and timely information are essential for > promoting inclusive and effective Internet governance. > - All stakeholders must renew their commitment to build a people > centered, inclusive and development oriented Information Society. Therefore > in pursuing the improvements of the Internet governance ecosystem, the > focus on Digital Development Agenda should be retained. > - Internet governance discussions would benefit from improved > communication and coordination between technical and non-technical > communities, providing a better understanding about the policy implications > in technical decisions and technical implications in policy decision. > > ### **[Issues dealing with institutional improvements.](#issues_inst_ > improvements)** > > - There is a need for mechanisms to consider emerging topics and issues > that are not currently being adequately addressed by existing Internet > governance arrangements and usually referred as orphan issues. > - There is a need for a strengthened Internet Governance Forum (IGF). > Important recommendations to that end were made by the UN CSTD working > group on IGF improvements. Improvements should include inter-alia: > > - Improved outcomes. Even keeping the nature of IGF as a > non-decision-making body, improvements can be implemented including > creative ways of providing outcomes/recommendations and the analysis of > policy options. > - Extending the IGF mandate beyond five-year terms, and considering > the IGF as a permanent forum. > - Ensuring guaranteed stable and predictable funding for the IGF is > essential. > - The IGF should adopt mechanisms to promote worldwide discussions > between meetings. The 1Net initiative could possibly provide a platform for > Multistakeholder intercessional dialogue. > > A strengthened IGF could better serve as a platform for discussing > those orphans and emerging issues already mentioned in the previous point > with a view to contributing to the identification of possible ways to > address them. > > - There should be adequate communication and coordination among existing > forums, task forces and organizations of the Internet governance ecosystem. > Periodical reports, formal liaisons and timely feedbacks are examples of > mechanisms that could be implemented to that end. It would be recommendable > to analyze the option of creating Internet governance coordination > mechanisms to perform on-going monitoring, analysis, and > information-sharing functions. > - In the follow up to the recent announcement of US Government with > regard to its intent to transition the stewardship of IANA functions, the > discussion about mechanisms for guaranteeing the transparency and > accountability of those functions after the US Government role ends, has to > take place through an open process with the participation of all > stakeholders extending beyond the ICANN community. The IANA functions are > currently performed under policies developed in processes hosted by several > organizations and forums. Any adopted mechanism should protect the bottom > up, open and participatory nature of those policy development processes and > ensure the stability and resilience of the Internet. It is desirable to > keep an adequate separation between the policy process and its operational > aspects. This transition should be completed by September 2015. > - It is expected that the process of globalization of ICANN speeds up > leading to a truly international and global organization with an > independent status and clear accountability mechanisms that satisfy > requirements from its own stakeholders and from the global community. The > relevant, balanced, and active representation from all regions and > stakeholders in the ICANN structure is a key issue in the process of a > successful globalization. > > ### **[Issues dealing with specific Internet Governance > topics](#issues_governance_topics)** > > 1. Security and Stability > > - It is necessary to continue working pursuing international agreements > on topics such jurisdiction, law enforcement assistance to promote > cybersecurity and prevent cybercrime. Discussions about those frameworks > should be held in a Multistakeholder manner. International agreements > should include measures of restraining cyber weapons development and > deployment. > - Initiatives to improve cybersecurity and address security threats > should involve collaboration among private sector, researchers, technical > experts, governments and NGOs. There are stakeholders that still need to > become more involved with cybersecurity, for example network operators and > software developers. > - There is room for new forums and initiatives, they should not > duplicate, but to add to current structures. All stakeholders should aim to > leverage from and improve these already existing cybersecurity > organizations. The experience accumulated by several of them, for example > the Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST) and Computer > Incident Response Teams (CERTs/CSIRTs), demonstrates that, in order to be > effective, any cybersecurity initiative depends on cooperation among > different stakeholders, and it can't be achieved via a single organization > or structure. > > 2. Internet Surveillance ? Mass and arbitrary surveillance undermines > trust in the Internet and trust in the Internet Governance ecosystem. Mass > surveillance and contradicts some of the principles proposed in this > document. Surveillance should be conducted in accordance with the > ?Necessary and Proportionate? principles. More dialogue is needed on this > topic at the international level using forums like IGF and the Human Rights > Council aiming to develop a common understanding on all the related aspects. > > 3. Capacity building - One of the key requirements for realization of > Internet governance principles is ensuring that diverse stakeholders have > not merely the opportunity for nominal participation, but in fact the > formation and the resources for effective participation. Capacity building > is important to support the emergence of true Multistakeholder communities, > especially in those regions where the participation of some stakeholders > group needs to be further strengthened. > > ### **[Points to be further discussed beyond NETmundial:](#points_further_ > disc)** > > Several contributions to NETmundial identified points that need further > discussion and better understanding regarding the following: > > - Different roles and responsibilities of stakeholders on the Internet > governance ecosystem, including the meaning and application of equal > footing. > - Jurisdiction issues and how they relate to Internet governance. > - A principles based code of conduct and related indicators for the > Internet governance ecosystem. > > ### **[Key messages](#key_messages)** > > The Internet governance ecosystem needs to continuously evolve as > described above, strengthening the Multistakeholder model across the entire > ecosystem. > > Capacity building is a crucial aspect to enhance the participation of all > stakeholders in a meaningful way. > > The IGF should be strengthened. > > There are issues that are not being treated properly by existing Internet > governance mechanisms. IGF is one of the venues for discussing ways to deal > with those issues. > > It is expected that ICANN continues working in evolving the organization > toward a more global organization with a balanced participation of all > stakeholders. > > The US Government?s special role with regard to the IANA functions should > end in a short term and the transition should be conducted in an open, > participatory and responsible manner. > > All the organizations with responsibilities in Internet governance > ecosystem have to develop principles for transparency, accountability and > inclusiveness and implement them. All the organizations should prepare > periodical reports on their progresses and status about these issues. Those > reports should be made publicly available. > > Further discussion is required to reach consensus on the roles and > responsibilities of stakeholders in Internet governance. > > All the organizations, forums and processes of the Internet Governance > ecosystem are expected to commit to implementing, as well as explicitly > adhere, to all the principles agreed in NETmundial. > > It is expected that the NETmundial findings and outcomes feed other > processes and forums, such as WSIS+10, IGF and all Internet governance > discussions held in different organizations and bodies at all levels. > > The follow up and future discussions of topics listed in this document > should prompt the creation of expert groups, task forces or groups of > facilitators convened by existing entities or bodies. They should present > reports of their works in major Internet governance meetings. > > > -- > Pranesh Prakash > Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society > T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org > ------------------- > Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School > M: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org > PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From rishab.bailey at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 14:01:39 2014 From: rishab.bailey at gmail.com (Rishab Bailey) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 23:31:39 +0530 Subject: [governance] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair Message-ID: Dear All, Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair for the meeting), please find attached: (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. Virgilio Almeida, (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. Virgilio Almeida; (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper giving some of the context behind this: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. Regards, Rishab Bailey (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Indian CS Email to NetMundial - April 7,2014 .pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 71954 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Letter to India-CS.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 124924 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Subi Chaturvedia. Plagiarism Amrit.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 464270 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Subi Chaturvedia. Plagiarism Turnitin.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 492673 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Appointment of civil society co chair.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 96336 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 jefsey at jefsey.com Tue Apr 8 14:37:33 2014 From: jefsey at jefsey.com (Jefsey) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 20:37:33 +0200 Subject: [governance] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document In-Reply-To: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> References: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> Message-ID: At 17:56 08/04/2014, Pranesh Prakash wrote: >PDF link: http://goo.gl/z5bFXm >https://wikileaks.org/netmundial-outcome/ > >NETmundial Executive Stakeholder Committee (EMC) Outcome Document >Tuesday 8 April 2014, 15:30 GMT Thank you for the news. All this seems nominal. However, the devil is in details and further misunderstandings. I entered the text under: http://dnsa.org/index.php/Wikileaks:_preparation_of_NETmundial2014 The talk page will list the relevant comments from IUsers point of view. Best jfc -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From rishab.bailey at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 16:04:04 2014 From: rishab.bailey at gmail.com (Rishab Bailey) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 01:34:04 +0530 Subject: [governance] Knowledge Commons statement on NetMundial Outcome Document (leaked by Wikileaks) Message-ID: Dear All, You may have seen that Wikileaks released the first draft of the NetMundial outcome document earlier today. Please find appended below, a response from Knowledge Commons which can also be viewed on our website at http://www.knowledgecommons.in/brasil/?page_id=214. Regards, Rishab -------- *Knowledge Commons Statement on Draft NetMundial document leaked by Wikileaks* *8 April 2014* Knowledge Commons has carefully examined the text on the Wikileaks websitethat purports to be the first iteration of the outcome document for NetMundial. Given we have read and analyzed all of the 187 submissions to NetMundial, we believe that the leaked document generally reflects the inputs received. Further, Knowledge Commons makes the following observations and recommendations: First, the document recognises the Internet as a 'universal global resource' [in Section 1. Internet Infrastructure]. Knowledge Commons believes that the Internet has become more than a resource, it is a public good and global commons upon which trade, media, education, health and government systems rely. Second, the document appropriately emphasizes the need for reform to democratize the multistakeholder system, acknowledging that decisions are taken without meaningful participation and in the absence of geographic and gender balance [in Section 2. Roadmap for the future evolution of Internet Governance]. Knowledge Commons believes there would be greater utility in clearly defining the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders and specifying the elements of a minimum standard set of guidelines, operating procedures, or the identification of an entity to elaborate these modalities for multistakeholder fora. Third, Knowledge Commons strongly welcomes the call for new international agreements on cyber weapons development and deployment [in Section 2. Issues dealing with specific Internet governance topics]. As more and more critical infrastructure resources around the world are maintained and operated through digital mechanisms, ensuring the security of these installations from targeted attacks is critical. Such an agreement is the core business of governments. . A multilateral agreement ensuring cyber peace and de-militarising the Internet is essential if we are not to see the Balkanisation of the Internet. Fourth, the document acknowledges that changes to the IANA function need to take place through discussion rather than announcement and that such discussion is still to take place [in Section 2. Issues dealing with Institutional Improvements]. Knowledge Commons notes that ICANN, which should be an independent entity immune from any jurisdiction, will be charged with the process, but given the document also acknowledges the current flaws in participation and decision making processes, believes that improved modalities and minimum standards should be applied in this discussion and decision making process. Fifth, the document condemns mass surveillance for undermining trust in the Internet. [in Section 2. Issues dealing with Institutional Improvements]. Knowledge Commons believes that democracy itself has been damaged and so too has diplomacy. The NetMundial should be calling for the cessation of the practices of the 5 Eyes countries that violate sovereignty of states and the human rights of citizens. While some countries may unilaterally declare such practices and the operation of secret courts lawful, the NetMundial meeting should more strongly resist the wholesale disregard for human rights including by ensuring that permissible derogation is proportionate and 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 carolina.rossini at gmail.com Tue Apr 8 16:06:41 2014 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 16:06:41 -0400 Subject: [governance] video up - The Global War for Internet Governance with Dr. Laura DeNardis Message-ID: The Global War for Internet Governance with Dr. Laura DeNardis http://newamerica.net/events/2014/global_war_for_internet_governance *Featured Speakers:* *Dr. Laura DeNardis * Author of *The Global War for Internet Governance* Professor in the School of Communication, American University *Benoni Belli* Minister Counselor at the Embassy of Brazil in Washington D.C. *Richard Beaird* Senior International Policy Advisor at Wiley Rein LLP *Emma Llanso* Director of Center for Democracy and Technology's Free Expression Project *Organizer and Moderator:* *Carolina Rossini * Project Director, Open Technology Institute, New America -- *Carolina Rossini* *Project Director, Latin America Resource Center* Open Technology Institute *New America Foundation* // http://carolinarossini.net/ + 1 6176979389 *carolina.rossini at gmail.com* skype: carolrossini @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 8 19:54:50 2014 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 11:54:50 +1200 Subject: [governance] Threats to Online Freedom of Expression in Fiji Message-ID: Dear All, I wish all those who are making tracks to Brazil the very best for the Net Mundial. This is a brief note to say that, Fiji recently promulgated the Electoral Decree. We do not have a Parliament at the moment but will have one after Elections. *Section 63 of the Electoral Decree says any person is prohibited from communicating political messages by telephone, internet, email, social media or other electronic means 48 hours before polling opens.* *Violating the decree can result in a 27,000 US dollar fine, or 10 years in jail.* The Transcripts of the Interview with a journalist or the audio pod can be found here: http://www.radionz.co.nz/international/programmes/datelinepacific/audio/2591849/fiji-constitution-would-trump-any-decree-in-court-lawyer 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 suresh at hserus.net Tue Apr 8 20:09:41 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 05:39:41 +0530 Subject: [governance] Threats to Online Freedom of Expression in Fiji In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <89FE82A1-865A-40A6-8ED7-5F15839B1401@hserus.net> It does make sense to have a moratorium on election campaigning for upto two days before the polls begin, and this prevents last minute rumors being started up against any candidate, or other dirty tricks (text message that the election is cancelled,mor polling station shifted to another location etc) --srs (iPad) > On 09-Apr-2014, at 5:24, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" wrote: > > Dear All, > > I wish all those who are making tracks to Brazil the very best for the Net Mundial. This is a brief note to say that, Fiji recently promulgated the Electoral Decree. We do not have a Parliament at the moment but will have one after Elections. > Section 63 of the Electoral Decree says any person is prohibited from communicating political messages by telephone, internet, email, social media or other electronic means 48 hours before polling opens. > > Violating the decree can result in a 27,000 US dollar fine, or 10 years in jail. > > The Transcripts of the Interview with a journalist or the audio pod can be found here: > > http://www.radionz.co.nz/international/programmes/datelinepacific/audio/2591849/fiji-constitution-would-trump-any-decree-in-court-lawyer > Kind Regards, > > Sala > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Apr 9 03:32:34 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 13:02:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [discuss] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document In-Reply-To: References: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> Message-ID: <5344F792.30705@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 09 April 2014 02:16 AM, Michel Gauthier wrote: > >> At 17:56 08/04/2014, Pranesh Prakash wrote: >>> https://wikileaks.org/netmundial-outcome/ > > The number of occurences of some words: democracy 0, multistakeholder - 17 people - 4, stakeholder - 34 Compare this with any other key political document related to constitutional moments like the Netmundial meetings - you will find repeated references to people and democracy, and hardly any to stakeholders and MSism..... A silent political revolution is taking place, right under our noses, as the proverbial Nero plays the flute... parminder > > Internet 77 > stakeholder 34 > Multisakeholder 17 > IGF 12 > Human rights 11 > NETmundial 9 > government 5 > ICANN 4 > IANA 3 > User 3 > globalization 2 > neutrality 1 > IP 0 > domain name 0 > DNS 0 > root 0 > > Interesting indication of the political priorities. > > M G > > > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list > discuss at 1net.org > http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 9 04:01:00 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 13:31:00 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [discuss] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document In-Reply-To: <5344F792.30705@itforchange.net> References: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> <5344F792.30705@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <145458102f0.27e9.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> This is not a political or intergovernmental document. So the use or non use of some terminology becomes quite an obvious choice. On 9 April 2014 1:03:06 pm parminder wrote: > > On Wednesday 09 April 2014 02:16 AM, Michel Gauthier wrote: > > > >> At 17:56 08/04/2014, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > >>> https://wikileaks.org/netmundial-outcome/ > > > > The number of occurences of some words: > > democracy 0, multistakeholder - 17 > > people - 4, stakeholder - 34 > > Compare this with any other key political document related to > constitutional moments like the Netmundial meetings - you will find > repeated references to people and democracy, and hardly any to stakeholders > and MSism..... > > A silent political revolution is taking place, right under our noses, as > the proverbial Nero plays the flute... > > parminder > > > > > > > Internet 77 > > stakeholder 34 > > Multisakeholder 17 > > IGF 12 > > Human rights 11 > > NETmundial 9 > > government 5 > > ICANN 4 > > IANA 3 > > User 3 > > globalization 2 > > neutrality 1 > > IP 0 > > domain name 0 > > DNS 0 > > root 0 > > > > Interesting indication of the political priorities. > > > > M G > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > discuss mailing list > > discuss at 1net.org > > http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From garth.graham at telus.net Wed Apr 9 14:08:07 2014 From: garth.graham at telus.net (Garth Graham) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 11:08:07 -0700 Subject: [governance] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document In-Reply-To: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> References: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> Message-ID: There are two key words used in this draft document that are mutually exclusive but not acknowledged as such - "universal" and "distributed." Universal is mechanistic and comes from the world of management control, where systems are closed and rules are imposed on them from outside. It reflects a conventional belief that the future can and should be rendered more predictable. Distributed describes a functional principle of complex adaptive systems, i.e. the world of ecosystems, where systems are open and rules emerge from internal relationships. The future of such systems cannot be known from their initial conditions. These two words represent structural principles of governance that are incompatible. I have always believed that the existence of the Internet was a symptom of the distributed systems worldview in action. To effectively increase the resilience of the Internet Governance Ecosystem, it is not enough to reference open systems. The processes of rules formation and future anticipation should be trending towards that word distributed and its internal relational implications. It seems to me that this document does not fully take the implications of distributed open systems to heart. The evidence of an intention to cling to the universal is the call that: > All the organizations, forums and processes of the Internet Governance ecosystem are expected to commit to implementing, as well as explicitly adhere, to all the principles agreed in NETmundial. To make such a commitment would be to accept that there are universal principles external to the Internet Governance ecosystem that govern what it can do and that can render its future more predictable. That pushes us towards some global centralizing mechanism. It's also bad systems theory. For example, if we defined the global in distributed terms as a "federation of locals," rather than as a universalizing principle, we insure that what we commit to is a process where the rules structuring relational interdependencies evolve within from common practice. GG On 2014-04-08, at 8:56 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > PDF link: http://goo.gl/z5bFXm > > https://wikileaks.org/netmundial-outcome/ > > NETmundial Executive Stakeholder Committee (EMC) Outcome Document > Tuesday 8 April 2014, 15:30 GMT > > Today WikiLeaks released the penultimate draft agreement ("Outcome Document") going into NETmundial 2014 - the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance. NETmundial is an international conference of twelve nations and other internet stakeholders, to be hosted in São Paulo, Brazil, April 23-24, convened to lay down a roadmap for internet governance. It is co-hosted by the twelve goverments of Argentina, Brazil, France, Ghana, Germany, India, Indonesia, South Africa, South Korea, Tunisia, Turkey and the United States of America. The document was prepared by the NETmundial Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) from the 180 NETmundial submissions and has been submitted to the High Level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC) for final comment. The HLMC comprises ministerial level representation from the twelve co-hosting nations and is due to give its feedback tomorrow, on April 9. > > Outcome Document > ---------------- > This document has been created by the Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) and is submitted to the High-Level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC). > Last Updated: April 3rd, 2014 -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 9 15:28:15 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 15:28:15 -0400 Subject: [governance] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document In-Reply-To: References: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> Message-ID: > All the organizations, forums and processes of the Internet Governance ecosystem are expected to commit to implementing, as well as explicitly adhere, to all the principles agreed in NETmundial. In this paragraph are we supposed to read "are expected to commit" as "it is probable that they will commit" or "they must commit"? Either meaning is possible in the context. Deirdre On 9 April 2014 14:08, Garth Graham wrote: > There are two key words used in this draft document that are mutually > exclusive but not acknowledged as such - "universal" and "distributed." > Universal is mechanistic and comes from the world of management control, > where systems are closed and rules are imposed on them from outside. It > reflects a conventional belief that the future can and should be rendered > more predictable. Distributed describes a functional principle of complex > adaptive systems, i.e. the world of ecosystems, where systems are open and > rules emerge from internal relationships. The future of such systems > cannot be known from their initial conditions. These two words represent > structural principles of governance that are incompatible. I have always > believed that the existence of the Internet was a symptom of the > distributed systems worldview in action. > > To effectively increase the resilience of the Internet Governance > Ecosystem, it is not enough to reference open systems. The processes of > rules formation and future anticipation should be trending towards that > word distributed and its internal relational implications. It seems to me > that this document does not fully take the implications of distributed open > systems to heart. The evidence of an intention to cling to the universal > is the call that: > > > All the organizations, forums and processes of the Internet Governance > ecosystem are expected to commit to implementing, as well as explicitly > adhere, to all the principles agreed in NETmundial. > > To make such a commitment would be to accept that there are universal > principles external to the Internet Governance ecosystem that govern what > it can do and that can render its future more predictable. That pushes us > towards some global centralizing mechanism. It's also bad systems theory. > For example, if we defined the global in distributed terms as a > "federation of locals," < > http://cirn.wikispaces.com/CI+Declaration+-+Principle+8+Discussion> > rather than as a universalizing principle, we insure that what we commit to > is a process where the rules structuring relational interdependencies > evolve within from common practice. > > GG > > On 2014-04-08, at 8:56 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > > > PDF link: http://goo.gl/z5bFXm > > > > https://wikileaks.org/netmundial-outcome/ > > > > NETmundial Executive Stakeholder Committee (EMC) Outcome Document > > Tuesday 8 April 2014, 15:30 GMT > > > > Today WikiLeaks released the penultimate draft agreement ("Outcome > Document") going into NETmundial 2014 - the Global Multistakeholder Meeting > on the Future of Internet Governance. NETmundial is an international > conference of twelve nations and other internet stakeholders, to be hosted > in São Paulo, Brazil, April 23-24, convened to lay down a roadmap for > internet governance. It is co-hosted by the twelve goverments of Argentina, > Brazil, France, Ghana, Germany, India, Indonesia, South Africa, South > Korea, Tunisia, Turkey and the United States of America. The document was > prepared by the NETmundial Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) from > the 180 NETmundial submissions and has been submitted to the High Level > Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC) for final comment. The HLMC comprises > ministerial level representation from the twelve co-hosting nations and is > due to give its feedback tomorrow, on April 9. > > > > Outcome Document > > ---------------- > > This document has been created by the Executive Multistakeholder > Committee (EMC) and is submitted to the High-Level Multistakeholder > Committee (HLMC). > > Last Updated: April 3rd, 2014 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 parminder at itforchange.net Thu Apr 10 01:47:25 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:17:25 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the Indian civil society. Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee and high level committee. At least please respond to the issue. If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now further exacerbated by the news report in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. Thanks parminder On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: > Dear All, > > Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of > NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair > for the meeting), please find attached: > > (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. > Virgilio Almeida, > (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. > Virgilio Almeida; > (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. > > Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper > giving some of the context behind this: > http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx > > > Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning > plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. > > Regards, > Rishab Bailey > (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Thu Apr 10 02:26:07 2014 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:26:07 +0200 Subject: [governance] APC looking for policy comms person Message-ID: <5346397F.7020503@apc.org> Apologies for cross posting. Analia Lavin whom many of you might have met is leaving us soon to do a Phd so we are lookin for someone new.. Spanish and French fluency would be important. Anriette. -------- APC to hire communications officer: http://www.apc.org/en/node/19142 Association for Progressive Communications (apc.org) has an opening for a communications officer to participate in the virtual communications team of the world's oldest online progressive network. The position is 60-80% time on a one-year contract with the option to renew if funding is available. Candidates should be available to begin in June 2014. The deadline for applications is 29 April 2014. *Job profile* You will lead communications work for one of APC's two programmes, our Communications and Internet Policy Programme (CIPP). We are looking for someone who has: * At least five years experience in communications, media relations and social marketing * Developed successful strategies and plans for campaigns, events and publication dissemination * Measurable success with campaigns and dissemination via social media, Twitter in particular * Experience working completely online including managing projects remotely * A concise, creative, confident communication style, with a strong visual sense and excellent English writing and editing skills * Experience working in the non-profit sector, specifically in internet policy * Experience dealing with multiple cultures and languages. Note that fluency in French, Spanish will be a distinct advantage. *Communications, media and social outreach* You will work on a four-person editorial team to produce original news and feature content in English, French and Spanish. A suitable, qualified candidate could also be appointed as editorial chief of our French-language website (APC.org/fr) and our twice-monthly French-language newsletter, APCNouvelles. On issues related to communications and internet policy, you will act as international media liaison and sometimes spokesperson with primarily print, web and radio media in English (and potentially Spanish and French). You will assist the communications team in developing and monitoring relationships with the media and in the production of media releases. You will keep APC up to date in social networking spaces, planning and coordinating strategic approaches to product launches and events. You will join one other communications officer in reporting to the communications manager and will work on a day-to-day basis with the CIPP manager and staff, as well as the entire APC staff and its members. Most of the work takes place in mailing lists. *Remuneration and working conditions* The remuneration for this position is negotiable depending on skills, qualifications and experience. The successful applicant is expected to provide his or her own computer, have easy access to an internet connection, and work during normal office hours. Reimbursement for office supplies and communication costs will be covered by APC. While much of the communications work will take place online, some travel to meetings, conferences and workshops is expected. *How to apply* Your statement of interest is extremely important. Your CV must be included as an attachment. Please consider the following in your statement: * A description of your interest in working with APC in this position * Your experience related to the requirements listed above * A rating of the languages you speak and write * A description of your computer skills * Other information you think might be of importance to our assessment of your application * Two references: names, relationship, contact details; at least one of these should be related to an online communications initiative in which you had a leadership role. Please send this information via email to jobs at apc.org with the subject line: "APC communications officer -- your name" by 29 April. -- Mallory Knodel Communications & Network Development Manager :: mallory at apc.org Association for Progressive Communications :: apc.org twitter. @malloryknodel :: xmpp. malloryk at im.mayfirst.org gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780 -- ------------------------------------------------------ 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 10 02:52:26 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:22:26 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1454a68a458.27e9.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> Given that most people on the list don't know her from adam, there isn't as much point as you would think in entering into a he said she said series of accusations against any specific individual. On 10 April 2014 11:18:34 am parminder wrote: > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society groups a > few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India wrote > a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was > most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with > regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the Indian > civil society. > > Now, we have a newspaper report > > which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much more > importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as > NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net steering > committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee and > high level committee. > > At least please respond to the issue. > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what > they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil > society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society > involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now further > exacerbated by the news report > > in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. > > Thanks > > parminder > > On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of > NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair for the > meeting), please find attached: > > > > (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. > Virgilio Almeida, > > (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. > Virgilio Almeida; > > (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. > > > > Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper > giving some of the context behind this: > http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx > > > > > > Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning > plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. > > > > Regards, > > Rishab Bailey > > (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Thu Apr 10 03:23:21 2014 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 17:23:21 +1000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> Hi Parminder, I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks back, but let me respond again as this is escalating. Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet governance were available – including from India, and including women from India. However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, particularly feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is that this is becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian woman whose only “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And there are plenty more of us who share that. The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some civil society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular “news”, and may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. However, it has the elements of a personal attack. So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less than optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil society rep appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not to pursue personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial in the prevailing circumstances. Ian Peter From: parminder Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the Indian civil society. Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee and high level committee. At least please respond to the issue. If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now further exacerbated by the news report in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. Thanks parminder On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: Dear All, Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair for the meeting), please find attached: (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. Virgilio Almeida, (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. Virgilio Almeida; (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper giving some of the context behind this: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. Regards, Rishab Bailey (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To 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 Apr 10 03:33:05 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 13:03:05 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> Message-ID: <1454a8dcff8.27e9.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> +1 On 10 April 2014 12:54:14 pm "Ian Peter" wrote: > Hi Parminder, > > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks back, > but let me respond again as this is escalating. > > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet > governance were available – including from India, and including women from > India. > > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, particularly > feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is that this is > becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian woman whose only > “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And there are plenty more > of us who share that. > > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some civil > society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular “news”, and > may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. However, it has the > elements of a personal attack. > > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less than > optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil society rep > appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not to pursue > personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial in the > prevailing circumstances. > > Ian Peter > > > > > > From: parminder Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > society co-chair > > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society groups a > few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India wrote > a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was > most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with > regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the Indian > civil society. > > Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of > plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly who > is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. > And still no response. > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net steering > committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee and > high level committee. > At least please respond to the issue. > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what they > would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil > society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society > involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now further > exacerbated by the news report in a top national daily of India. And we > find no visible support. > Thanks > > parminder > > On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: > > Dear All, > > Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of > NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair for the > meeting), please find attached: > > (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. > Virgilio Almeida, > (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. Virgilio > Almeida; > (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. > > Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper > giving some of the context behind this: > http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx > > Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning > plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. > > Regards, > Rishab Bailey > (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Thu Apr 10 03:49:05 2014 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 03:49:05 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> Message-ID: <53464CF1.7070401@acm.org> Ian, Thank you for this. I was afraid to jump into this discussion, but I want to endorse what you have said. avri On 10-Apr-14 03:23, Ian Peter wrote: > Hi Parminder, > > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks > back, but let me respond again as this is escalating. > > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet > governance were available – including from India, and including women > from India. > > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, > particularly feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is > that this is becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian > woman whose only “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And > there are plenty more of us who share that. > > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some > civil society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular > “news”, and may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. > However, it has the elements of a personal attack. > > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less > than optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil > society rep appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not > to pursue personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial > in the prevailing circumstances. > > Ian Peter > > > > > *From:* parminder > *Sent:* Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > *Subject:* [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > society co-chair > > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society > groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from > India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of > NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from the > global networks with regard to that representation, which is indeed > disrespectful of the Indian civil society. > > Now, we have a newspaper report > > which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much > more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as > NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net > steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive > committee and high level committee. > > At least please respond to the issue. > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what > they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil > society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society > involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now > further exacerbated by the news report > > in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. > > Thanks > > parminder > > On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of >> NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair >> for the meeting), please find attached: >> >> (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >> Virgilio Almeida, >> (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >> Virgilio Almeida; >> (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. >> >> Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper >> giving some of the context behind this: >> http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx >> >> >> Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning >> plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. >> >> Regards, >> Rishab Bailey >> (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 lorena at collaboratory.de Thu Apr 10 04:00:19 2014 From: lorena at collaboratory.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lorena_Jaume-Palas=ED?=) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 10:00:19 +0200 Subject: AW: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair Message-ID: +1 Von Samsung Galaxy Note gesendetAvri Doria hat geschrieben: Ian, Thank you for this.  I was afraid to jump into this discussion, but I want to endorse what you have said. avri On 10-Apr-14 03:23, Ian Peter wrote: > Hi Parminder, >  > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks > back, but let me respond again as this is escalating. >  > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet > governance were available – including from India, and including women > from India. >  > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, > particularly feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is > that this is becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian > woman whose only “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And > there are plenty more of us who share that. >  > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some > civil society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular > “news”, and may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. > However, it has the elements of a personal attack. >  > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less > than optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil > society rep appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not > to pursue personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial > in the prevailing circumstances. >  > Ian Peter >  >  >  >  > *From:* parminder > *Sent:* Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > *Subject:* [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > society co-chair >  > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society > groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from > India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of > NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from the > global networks with regard to that representation, which is indeed > disrespectful of the Indian civil society. > > Now, we have a newspaper report > > which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much > more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as > NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net > steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive > committee and high level committee. > > At least please respond to the issue. > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what > they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil > society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society > involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now > further exacerbated by the news report > > in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. > > Thanks > > parminder > > On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of >> NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair >> for the meeting), please find attached: >> >> (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >> Virgilio Almeida, >> (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >> Virgilio Almeida; >> (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. >> >> Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper >> giving some of the context behind this: >> http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx >> >> >> Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning >> plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. >> >> Regards, >> Rishab Bailey >> (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Apr 10 05:10:30 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 14:40:30 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> Message-ID: <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> Ian Your response is well I dont know whether I should call it shocking or amusing... As the article shows, it is not about Subi but what and who is behind her. One question occurs to me to ask you and I will be happy if you respond to it. Would you have been as indifferent if you had learnt on considerable evidence that someone had been planted into the position of civil society co chair of NetMundial by say, the Iranian government? Why would a similar subversive act of US big business look any different to you, and your supporters here? parminder PS: The shocking part are the considerable allegations your email below makes about the Indian civil society groups involved and the journalist/ newspaper who wrote the article... I simply dont know what to make of your stance. On Thursday 10 April 2014 12:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > Hi Parminder, > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks > back, but let me respond again as this is escalating. > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I > also agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of > internet governance were available – including from India, and > including women from India. > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, > particularly feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is > that this is becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young > Indian woman whose only “crime”, as far as I can see, is being > ambitious. And there are plenty more of us who share that. > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some > civil society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular > “news”, and may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. > However, it has the elements of a personal attack. > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less > than optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil > society rep appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is > not to pursue personal attacks and to work as best we can during > NetMundial in the prevailing circumstances. > Ian Peter > *From:* parminder > *Sent:* Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > ; > mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > *Subject:* [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil > Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment > of civil society co-chair > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society > groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations > from India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of > NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from > the global networks with regard to that representation, which is > indeed disrespectful of the Indian civil society. > > Now, we have a newspaper report > > which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much > more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as > NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net > steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive > committee and high level committee. > > At least please respond to the issue. > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what > they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil > society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society > involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now > further exacerbated by the news report > > in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. > > Thanks > > parminder > > On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair >> of NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society >> co-chair for the meeting), please find attached: >> >> (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >> Virgilio Almeida, >> (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >> Virgilio Almeida; >> (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. >> >> Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper >> giving some of the context behind this: >> http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx >> >> >> Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning >> plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. >> >> Regards, >> Rishab Bailey >> (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 anriette at apc.org Thu Apr 10 05:45:42 2014 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:45:42 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <53465BD5.303@apc.org> References: <53465BD5.303@apc.org> Message-ID: <53466846.3040208@apc.org> Resending this. Seems not to have gone through earlier. Anriette ----------- Dear Parminder and all I shared the concerns expressed in the original letter from civil society to the Chair of the NetMundial, and feel that the selection process of the co-chairs were simply not 'solid' enough. Concerns have been raised by some of the other co-chairs too. I think it was important for Indian civil society to send this letter. There are many examples when selection of non-governmental stakeholders is done in a pretty roughshod personalised ways. It affects CS most of all, but in this case selection of the business co-chair has also been questioned. It is an example of the lack of maturity/clarity etc. in multi-stakeholder processes which so many of you have discussed. But I believe that the point has been made, and that the best way to move forward is to focus on the event, on civil society's voice at the event, and on our influence on the outcomes. Engaging in taking this forward at this point would, I believe, put these at risk, and possibly harm the legitimacy of the overall process. Consider all the hard work that civil society colleagues in Brazil have put into this event. They are working very, very hard to make it inclusive, to get people CS to Sao Paulo, and to make sure that the process gives everyone equal voice. I am not saying the process is perfect, but I think effort has been made to keep it inclusive and transparent. This is clearly an example of certain decisions being problematicm - this being one of them. But I think that they have acknowledged it, and we should move on, and use this event as the strategic opportunity I still believe it can be. Co-chair selection should not be seen as a primary way of recognising CS. It is pretty ceremonial. Far more important for us to look at whether our views are reflected in the draft outcome docs. I also believe that continuing with this campaign will damage civil society in other ways. It is not a constructive struggle. Attacks of a personal nature against anyone tends to be negative and rarely have positive outcomes. At this point we should be looking at the bigger picture of the substantive issues that we want to be discussed at NetMundial. For example, I am concerned that surveillance is getting far less focus than it deserves to. There is just a short reference to mass surveillance in the draft outcome doc. Going forward the important challenge for us is to find ways of these processes become less adhoc in the future. Anriette On 10/04/2014 07:47, parminder wrote: > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society > groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations > from India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of > NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from > the global networks with regard to that representation, which is > indeed disrespectful of the Indian civil society. > > Now, we have a newspaper report > > which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much > more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as > NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net > steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive > committee and high level committee. > > At least please respond to the issue. > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what > they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil > society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society > involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now > further exacerbated by the news report > > in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. > > Thanks > > parminder > > On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair >> of NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society >> co-chair for the meeting), please find attached: >> >> (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >> Virgilio Almeida, >> (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >> Virgilio Almeida; >> (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. >> >> Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper >> giving some of the context behind this: >> http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx >> >> >> Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning >> plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. >> >> Regards, >> Rishab Bailey >> (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) > -- ------------------------------------------------------ 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 10 06:25:58 2014 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 06:25:58 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> Message-ID: I agree with Ian. These seem to be unfounded allegations. In short a smear campaign with zero evidence behind it. "Deepening the controversy, Bhatia also appears to be particularly close to one of the civil society bodies on the MAG. Media for Change is a trust operated by Subi Chaturvedi, an assistant professor at Delhi-based Lady Shri Ram College for women. " Being "particularly close" is not evidence of any wrongdoing. I agree with Anriette. It is also impolitic. -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:10 AM, parminder wrote: > Ian > > Your response is well I dont know whether I should call it shocking or > amusing... As the article shows, it is not about Subi but what and who is > behind her. One question occurs to me to ask you and I will be happy if you > respond to it. Would you have been as indifferent if you had learnt on > considerable evidence that someone had been planted into the position of > civil society co chair of NetMundial by say, the Iranian government? Why > would a similar subversive act of US big business look any different to you, > and your supporters here? > > parminder > > PS: The shocking part are the considerable allegations your email below > makes about the Indian civil society groups involved and the journalist/ > newspaper who wrote the article... I simply dont know what to make of your > stance. > > > On Thursday 10 April 2014 12:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > > Hi Parminder, > > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks back, > but let me respond again as this is escalating. > > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet > governance were available – including from India, and including women from > India. > > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, particularly > feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is that this is > becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian woman whose only > “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And there are plenty more > of us who share that. > > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some civil > society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular “news”, and > may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. However, it has the > elements of a personal attack. > > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less than > optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil society rep > appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not to pursue > personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial in the > prevailing circumstances. > > Ian Peter > > > > > From: parminder > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > society co-chair > > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society groups a > few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India wrote > a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was > most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with > regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the Indian > civil society. > > Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of > plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly who > is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And > still no response. > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net steering > committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee and > high level committee. > > At least please respond to the issue. > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what they > would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil society... > Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in IG > writing a representation, about issues that are now further exacerbated by > the news report in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible > support. > > Thanks > > parminder > > On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: > > Dear All, > > Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of > NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair for the > meeting), please find attached: > > (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. > Virgilio Almeida, > (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. Virgilio > Almeida; > (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. > > Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper giving > some of the context behind this: > http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx > > Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning plagiarism > charges) are also attached to this email. > > Regards, > Rishab Bailey > (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) > > > ________________________________ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Thu Apr 10 06:52:02 2014 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 19:52:02 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi, I also share the discomfort expressed by Indian civil society groups on the selection process, but was afraid to say more than that as I have little capacity and interest in examining what is true or who is right inside Indian CS community. Thus I echo with Anriette's fairly neutral, honest and constructive approach. Let's move on. Izumi 2014年4月10日木曜日、McTimさんは書きました: > I agree with Ian. > > These seem to be unfounded allegations. In short a smear campaign > with zero evidence behind it. > > "Deepening the controversy, Bhatia also appears to be particularly > close to one of the civil society bodies on the MAG. Media for Change > is a trust operated by Subi Chaturvedi, an assistant professor at > Delhi-based Lady Shri Ram College for women. " > > Being "particularly close" is not evidence of any wrongdoing. > > I agree with Anriette. It is also impolitic. > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:10 AM, parminder > wrote: > > Ian > > > > Your response is well I dont know whether I should call it shocking or > > amusing... As the article shows, it is not about Subi but what and who is > > behind her. One question occurs to me to ask you and I will be happy if > you > > respond to it. Would you have been as indifferent if you had learnt on > > considerable evidence that someone had been planted into the position of > > civil society co chair of NetMundial by say, the Iranian government? Why > > would a similar subversive act of US big business look any different to > you, > > and your supporters here? > > > > parminder > > > > PS: The shocking part are the considerable allegations your email below > > makes about the Indian civil society groups involved and the journalist/ > > newspaper who wrote the article... I simply dont know what to make of > your > > stance. > > > > > > On Thursday 10 April 2014 12:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > > > > Hi Parminder, > > > > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks > back, > > but let me respond again as this is escalating. > > > > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the > > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also > > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet > > governance were available - including from India, and including women > from > > India. > > > > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi > > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, > particularly > > feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is that this is > > becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian woman whose > only > > “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And there are plenty > more > > of us who share that. > > > > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some > civil > > society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular “news”, and > > may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. However, it has the > > elements of a personal attack. > > > > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while > > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial > > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less > than > > optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil society > rep > > appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not to pursue > > personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial in the > > prevailing circumstances. > > > > Ian Peter > > > > > > > > > > From: parminder > > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > > Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society > > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > > society co-chair > > > > > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society > groups a > > few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India > wrote > > a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was > > most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with > > regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the > Indian > > civil society. > > > > Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of > > plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly > who > > is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. > And > > still no response. > > > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net > steering > > committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee > and > > high level committee. > > > > At least please respond to the issue. > > > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what they > > would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil > society... > > Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in IG > -- >> 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 williams.deirdre at gmail.com Thu Apr 10 08:56:34 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:56:34 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> Message-ID: In this discussion we seem to be missing the most important issue; as Suresh wrote earlier in this thread "most people on the list don't know her from adam". If we can demonstrate in a more concrete manner that the statement is true, and not simply an individual opinion, then that should be communicated to the meeting organisers and to the general community. Whoever the "representative of civil society" is, he/she should be recognised by civil society as coming from among them. Apart from that I agree with Anriette and others that we should be focussing our energy on the preliminary documents for the meeting. Deirdre On 10 April 2014 06:52, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Hi, > I also share the discomfort expressed by Indian civil society groups on > the selection process, but was afraid to say more than that as I have > little capacity and interest in examining what is true or who is right > inside Indian CS community. > > Thus I echo with Anriette's fairly neutral, honest and constructive > approach. > > Let's move on. > > Izumi > > > 2014年4月10日木曜日、McTimさんは書きました: > > I agree with Ian. >> >> These seem to be unfounded allegations. In short a smear campaign >> with zero evidence behind it. >> >> "Deepening the controversy, Bhatia also appears to be particularly >> close to one of the civil society bodies on the MAG. Media for Change >> is a trust operated by Subi Chaturvedi, an assistant professor at >> Delhi-based Lady Shri Ram College for women. " >> >> Being "particularly close" is not evidence of any wrongdoing. >> >> I agree with Anriette. It is also impolitic. >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> >> McTim >> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A >> route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:10 AM, parminder >> wrote: >> > Ian >> > >> > Your response is well I dont know whether I should call it shocking or >> > amusing... As the article shows, it is not about Subi but what and who >> is >> > behind her. One question occurs to me to ask you and I will be happy if >> you >> > respond to it. Would you have been as indifferent if you had learnt on >> > considerable evidence that someone had been planted into the position of >> > civil society co chair of NetMundial by say, the Iranian government? Why >> > would a similar subversive act of US big business look any different to >> you, >> > and your supporters here? >> > >> > parminder >> > >> > PS: The shocking part are the considerable allegations your email below >> > makes about the Indian civil society groups involved and the journalist/ >> > newspaper who wrote the article... I simply dont know what to make of >> your >> > stance. >> > >> > >> > On Thursday 10 April 2014 12:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote: >> > >> > Hi Parminder, >> > >> > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks >> back, >> > but let me respond again as this is escalating. >> > >> > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the >> > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also >> > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet >> > governance were available - including from India, and including women >> from >> > India. >> > >> > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi >> > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, >> particularly >> > feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is that this is >> > becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian woman whose >> only >> > “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And there are plenty >> more >> > of us who share that. >> > >> > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some >> civil >> > society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular “news”, >> and >> > may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. However, it has the >> > elements of a personal attack. >> > >> > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while >> > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial >> > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less >> than >> > optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil society >> rep >> > appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not to pursue >> > personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial in the >> > prevailing circumstances. >> > >> > Ian Peter >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > From: parminder >> > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM >> > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >> > Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society >> > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil >> > society co-chair >> > >> > >> > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... >> > >> > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society >> groups a >> > few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India >> wrote >> > a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was >> > most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with >> > regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the >> Indian >> > civil society. >> > >> > Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of >> > plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly >> who >> > is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big >> business. And >> > still no response. >> > >> > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net >> steering >> > committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee >> and >> > high level committee. >> > >> > At least please respond to the issue. >> > >> > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what >> they >> > would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil >> society... >> > Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in IG >> > > > -- > >> 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 > > -- “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 ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Apr 10 09:32:18 2014 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 22:32:18 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> On Apr 10, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > In this discussion we seem to be missing the most important issue; as Suresh wrote earlier in this thread "most people on the list don't know her from adam". If we can demonstrate in a more concrete manner that the statement is true, and not simply an individual opinion, then that should be communicated to the meeting organisers and to the general community. Whoever the "representative of civil society" is, he/she should be recognised by civil society as coming from among them. After members of a number of Indian civil society organizations raised this matter a few weeks ago, we asked for clarification through the executive multistakeholder committee. We were told the selection of co-chairs was the prerogative of the host country chair of the meeting. This is not unusual, for example the selection of Chair of the IGF and IGF session chairs is the choice of the host country. It seems no stakeholder group was consulted about these appointments, civil society has not been treated differently (that of course does not make it right.) So it doesn't really matter if we "don't know her from adam" (hello :-)). I am not saying this is the correct way to continue, and hopefully we'll see relevant text about the broader issue of selection for such positions in the NETmundial drafts. As for the content of the newspaper article, there's a lot of conjecture and not very much relevant fact. That is not to dismiss the concerns of the organizations raising the complaint, but there's not much hard evidence. I agree with Anriette's comments. Adam > Apart from that I agree with Anriette and others that we should be focussing our energy on the preliminary documents for the meeting. > Deirdre > > > On 10 April 2014 06:52, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Hi, > I also share the discomfort expressed by Indian civil society groups on the selection process, but was afraid to say more than that as I have little capacity and interest in examining what is true or who is right inside Indian CS community. > > Thus I echo with Anriette's fairly neutral, honest and constructive approach. > > Let's move on. > > Izumi > > > 2014年4月10日木曜日、McTimさんは書きました: > > I agree with Ian. > > These seem to be unfounded allegations. In short a smear campaign > with zero evidence behind it. > > "Deepening the controversy, Bhatia also appears to be particularly > close to one of the civil society bodies on the MAG. Media for Change > is a trust operated by Subi Chaturvedi, an assistant professor at > Delhi-based Lady Shri Ram College for women. " > > Being "particularly close" is not evidence of any wrongdoing. > > I agree with Anriette. It is also impolitic. > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:10 AM, parminder wrote: > > Ian > > > > Your response is well I dont know whether I should call it shocking or > > amusing... As the article shows, it is not about Subi but what and who is > > behind her. One question occurs to me to ask you and I will be happy if you > > respond to it. Would you have been as indifferent if you had learnt on > > considerable evidence that someone had been planted into the position of > > civil society co chair of NetMundial by say, the Iranian government? Why > > would a similar subversive act of US big business look any different to you, > > and your supporters here? > > > > parminder > > > > PS: The shocking part are the considerable allegations your email below > > makes about the Indian civil society groups involved and the journalist/ > > newspaper who wrote the article... I simply dont know what to make of your > > stance. > > > > > > On Thursday 10 April 2014 12:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > > > > Hi Parminder, > > > > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks back, > > but let me respond again as this is escalating. > > > > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the > > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also > > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet > > governance were available – including from India, and including women from > > India. > > > > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi > > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, particularly > > feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is that this is > > becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian woman whose only > > “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And there are plenty more > > of us who share that. > > > > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some civil > > society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular “news”, and > > may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. However, it has the > > elements of a personal attack. > > > > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while > > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial > > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less than > > optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil society rep > > appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not to pursue > > personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial in the > > prevailing circumstances. > > > > Ian Peter > > > > > > > > > > From: parminder > > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > > Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society > > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > > society co-chair > > > > > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society groups a > > few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India wrote > > a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was > > most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with > > regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the Indian > > civil society. > > > > Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of > > plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly who > > is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And > > still no response. > > > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net steering > > committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee and > > high level committee. > > > > At least please respond to the issue. > > > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what they > > would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil society... > > Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in IG > > > -- > >> 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 > > > > > -- > “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 garth.graham at telus.net Thu Apr 10 09:33:01 2014 From: garth.graham at telus.net (Garth Graham) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 06:33:01 -0700 Subject: [governance] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document In-Reply-To: References: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> Message-ID: <9E809D34-419B-42E2-9830-EB753F108022@telus.net> That's a good question, particularly because the capacity of the individual to make a choice, and to thereby gain the freedom that results from commitment, is fundamental to the formation of community. But, in that phrase, "is expected to commit," I'm hearing someone undefined asking "all" who come to the table to swear something like an oath of allegiance. Elsewhere in the draft, you become defined as an "interested party" by "committing to "advancing this discussion" within a particular framework. Then there's a phrase with an imperative, "All stakeholders MUST renew their commitment to build a people centered, inclusive and development oriented Information Society." Isn't there a whiff of the ecclesiastical in this language? WSIS never defined "Information Society" and neither does this draft NETmundial outcome document. It would seem to me that "trust, then run the Information Society's code" should be enough of a commitment. I remain committed to community networking. In the framework of exploring what happens to community when we are all online, I see that local issues of adapting the uses of the Internet for community development actually represent issues of governance. I see that community is a critical structural element of the changing "distributed" nature of the societies that are emerging. In another thread on IGC, Anriette Esterhuysen (April 10/14) noted the importance "for us to look at whether our views are reflected in the draft outcome docs." I'm not finding the view that the global has become a federation of locals reflected in the document. GG On 2014-04-09, at 12:28 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > > All the organizations, forums and processes of the Internet Governance ecosystem are expected to commit to implementing, as well as explicitly adhere, to all the principles agreed in NETmundial. > > In this paragraph are we supposed to read "are expected to commit" as "it is probable that they will commit" or "they must commit"? Either meaning is possible in the context. > Deirdre > > > On 9 April 2014 14:08, Garth Graham wrote: > There are two key words used in this draft document that are mutually exclusive but not acknowledged as such - "universal" and "distributed." Universal is mechanistic and comes from the world of management control, where systems are closed and rules are imposed on them from outside. It reflects a conventional belief that the future can and should be rendered more predictable. Distributed describes a functional principle of complex adaptive systems, i.e. the world of ecosystems, where systems are open and rules emerge from internal relationships. The future of such systems cannot be known from their initial conditions. These two words represent structural principles of governance that are incompatible. I have always believed that the existence of the Internet was a symptom of the distributed systems worldview in action. > > To effectively increase the resilience of the Internet Governance Ecosystem, it is not enough to reference open systems. The processes of rules formation and future anticipation should be trending towards that word distributed and its internal relational implications. It seems to me that this document does not fully take the implications of distributed open systems to heart. The evidence of an intention to cling to the universal is the call that: > > > All the organizations, forums and processes of the Internet Governance ecosystem are expected to commit to implementing, as well as explicitly adhere, to all the principles agreed in NETmundial. > > To make such a commitment would be to accept that there are universal principles external to the Internet Governance ecosystem that govern what it can do and that can render its future more predictable. That pushes us towards some global centralizing mechanism. It's also bad systems theory. For example, if we defined the global in distributed terms as a "federation of locals," rather than as a universalizing principle, we insure that what we commit to is a process where the rules structuring relational interdependencies evolve within from common practice. > > GG > > On 2014-04-08, at 8:56 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > > > PDF link: http://goo.gl/z5bFXm > > > > https://wikileaks.org/netmundial-outcome/ > > > > NETmundial Executive Stakeholder Committee (EMC) Outcome Document > > Tuesday 8 April 2014, 15:30 GMT > > > > Today WikiLeaks released the penultimate draft agreement ("Outcome Document") going into NETmundial 2014 - the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance. NETmundial is an international conference of twelve nations and other internet stakeholders, to be hosted in São Paulo, Brazil, April 23-24, convened to lay down a roadmap for internet governance. It is co-hosted by the twelve goverments of Argentina, Brazil, France, Ghana, Germany, India, Indonesia, South Africa, South Korea, Tunisia, Turkey and the United States of America. The document was prepared by the NETmundial Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) from the 180 NETmundial submissions and has been submitted to the High Level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC) for final comment. The HLMC comprises ministerial level representation from the twelve co-hosting nations and is due to give its feedback tomorrow, on April 9. > > > > Outcome Document > > ---------------- > > This document has been created by the Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) and is submitted to the High-Level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC). > > Last Updated: April 3rd, 2014 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Thu Apr 10 10:17:36 2014 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 10:17:36 -0400 Subject: [governance] Press Release International - Public Interest Groups Send Letter Expressing Concerns on DOTCOM Act to House Message-ID: http://www.publicknowledge.org/news-blog/press-release/public-interest-groups-send-letter-expressing-concerns-on-dotcom-act-to-hou -- *Carolina Rossini* *Project Director, Latin America Resource Center* Open Technology Institute *New America Foundation* // http://carolinarossini.net/ + 1 6176979389 *carolina.rossini at gmail.com* skype: carolrossini @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 10 10:46:36 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 10:46:36 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> Message-ID: "We were told the selection of co-chairs was the prerogative of the host country chair of the meeting." This is clearly something with which we are in no position to argue, since it is not "our" meeting. However any designation of that person as from civil society or representing civil society is surely something that can be questioned. The meeting has set great public store on inclusion, transparency and openness. If the majority of persons already defined as "civil society" are unfamiliar with the person chosen this becomes an important point, and such a comment should be welcomed by the organisers. But we don't yet know whether "the majority of persons already defined as "civil society" are unfamiliar with the person chosen", so far we have only conjecture. For myself I had never heard of her before the announcement and had some difficulty finding any information. (And I do know Adam :-) ) I would agree that personal issues about the person selected are not particularly relevant at this point. And yes, once again we urgently need to address ourselves to the meeting documents as suggested by Anriette. Deirdre On 10 April 2014 09:32, Adam Peake wrote: > > On Apr 10, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > > > In this discussion we seem to be missing the most important issue; as > Suresh wrote earlier in this thread "most people on the list don't know her > from adam". If we can demonstrate in a more concrete manner that the > statement is true, and not simply an individual opinion, then that should > be communicated to the meeting organisers and to the general community. > Whoever the "representative of civil society" is, he/she should be > recognised by civil society as coming from among them. > > After members of a number of Indian civil society organizations raised > this matter a few weeks ago, we asked for clarification through the > executive multistakeholder committee. We were told the selection of > co-chairs was the prerogative of the host country chair of the meeting. > This is not unusual, for example the selection of Chair of the IGF and IGF > session chairs is the choice of the host country. It seems no stakeholder > group was consulted about these appointments, civil society has not been > treated differently (that of course does not make it right.) So it doesn't > really matter if we "don't know her from adam" (hello :-)). > > I am not saying this is the correct way to continue, and hopefully we'll > see relevant text about the broader issue of selection for such positions > in the NETmundial drafts. > > As for the content of the newspaper article, there's a lot of conjecture > and not very much relevant fact. That is not to dismiss the concerns of > the organizations raising the complaint, but there's not much hard > evidence. I agree with Anriette's comments. > > Adam > > > > > Apart from that I agree with Anriette and others that we should be > focussing our energy on the preliminary documents for the meeting. > > Deirdre > > > > > > On 10 April 2014 06:52, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Hi, > > I also share the discomfort expressed by Indian civil society groups on > the selection process, but was afraid to say more than that as I have > little capacity and interest in examining what is true or who is right > inside Indian CS community. > > > > Thus I echo with Anriette's fairly neutral, honest and constructive > approach. > > > > Let's move on. > > > > Izumi > > > > > > 2014年4月10日木曜日、McTimさんは書きました: > > > > I agree with Ian. > > > > These seem to be unfounded allegations. In short a smear campaign > > with zero evidence behind it. > > > > "Deepening the controversy, Bhatia also appears to be particularly > > close to one of the civil society bodies on the MAG. Media for Change > > is a trust operated by Subi Chaturvedi, an assistant professor at > > Delhi-based Lady Shri Ram College for women. " > > > > Being "particularly close" is not evidence of any wrongdoing. > > > > I agree with Anriette. It is also impolitic. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > > > McTim > > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:10 AM, parminder > wrote: > > > Ian > > > > > > Your response is well I dont know whether I should call it shocking or > > > amusing... As the article shows, it is not about Subi but what and who > is > > > behind her. One question occurs to me to ask you and I will be happy > if you > > > respond to it. Would you have been as indifferent if you had learnt on > > > considerable evidence that someone had been planted into the position > of > > > civil society co chair of NetMundial by say, the Iranian government? > Why > > > would a similar subversive act of US big business look any different > to you, > > > and your supporters here? > > > > > > parminder > > > > > > PS: The shocking part are the considerable allegations your email below > > > makes about the Indian civil society groups involved and the > journalist/ > > > newspaper who wrote the article... I simply dont know what to make of > your > > > stance. > > > > > > > > > On Thursday 10 April 2014 12:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > > > > > > Hi Parminder, > > > > > > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks > back, > > > but let me respond again as this is escalating. > > > > > > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the > > > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also > > > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet > > > governance were available - including from India, and including women > from > > > India. > > > > > > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi > > > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, > particularly > > > feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is that this is > > > becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian woman whose > only > > > “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And there are plenty > more > > > of us who share that. > > > > > > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some > civil > > > society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular “news”, > and > > > may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. However, it has > the > > > elements of a personal attack. > > > > > > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while > > > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial > > > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less > than > > > optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil > society rep > > > appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not to pursue > > > personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial in the > > > prevailing circumstances. > > > > > > Ian Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: parminder > > > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM > > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > > > Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society > > > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > > > society co-chair > > > > > > > > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... > > > > > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society > groups a > > > few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India > wrote > > > a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It > was > > > most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks > with > > > regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the > Indian > > > civil society. > > > > > > Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of > > > plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows > clearly who > > > is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big > business. And > > > still no response. > > > > > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net > steering > > > committee members, and civil society members of the executive > committee and > > > high level committee. > > > > > > At least please respond to the issue. > > > > > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what > they > > > would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil > society... > > > Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in > IG > > > > > > -- > > >> 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 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > “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 > > -- “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 suresh at hserus.net Thu Apr 10 11:11:16 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 20:41:16 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> Message-ID: <21D2C52A-1B8D-4903-8D78-1E4E244ECD20@hserus.net> As someone else (Ian, right) pointed out she appears involved in other than igov civil society (womens empowerment etc) circles besides teaching at a top flight womens' college in New Delhi. --srs (iPad) > On 10-Apr-2014, at 20:16, Deirdre Williams wrote: > > "We were told the selection of co-chairs was the prerogative of the host country chair of the meeting." > This is clearly something with which we are in no position to argue, since it is not "our" meeting. > However any designation of that person as from civil society or representing civil society is surely something that can be questioned. The meeting has set great public store on inclusion, transparency and openness. If the majority of persons already defined as "civil society" are unfamiliar with the person chosen this becomes an important point, and such a comment should be welcomed by the organisers. > But we don't yet know whether "the majority of persons already defined as "civil society" are unfamiliar with the person chosen", so far we have only conjecture. For myself I had never heard of her before the announcement and had some difficulty finding any information. (And I do know Adam :-) ) > I would agree that personal issues about the person selected are not particularly relevant at this point. > And yes, once again we urgently need to address ourselves to the meeting documents as suggested by Anriette. > Deirdre > > >> On 10 April 2014 09:32, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> On Apr 10, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: >> >> > In this discussion we seem to be missing the most important issue; as Suresh wrote earlier in this thread "most people on the list don't know her from adam". If we can demonstrate in a more concrete manner that the statement is true, and not simply an individual opinion, then that should be communicated to the meeting organisers and to the general community. Whoever the "representative of civil society" is, he/she should be recognised by civil society as coming from among them. >> >> After members of a number of Indian civil society organizations raised this matter a few weeks ago, we asked for clarification through the executive multistakeholder committee. We were told the selection of co-chairs was the prerogative of the host country chair of the meeting. This is not unusual, for example the selection of Chair of the IGF and IGF session chairs is the choice of the host country. It seems no stakeholder group was consulted about these appointments, civil society has not been treated differently (that of course does not make it right.) So it doesn't really matter if we "don't know her from adam" (hello :-)). >> >> I am not saying this is the correct way to continue, and hopefully we'll see relevant text about the broader issue of selection for such positions in the NETmundial drafts. >> >> As for the content of the newspaper article, there's a lot of conjecture and not very much relevant fact. That is not to dismiss the concerns of the organizations raising the complaint, but there's not much hard evidence. I agree with Anriette's comments. >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> > Apart from that I agree with Anriette and others that we should be focussing our energy on the preliminary documents for the meeting. >> > Deirdre >> > >> > >> > On 10 April 2014 06:52, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> > Hi, >> > I also share the discomfort expressed by Indian civil society groups on the selection process, but was afraid to say more than that as I have little capacity and interest in examining what is true or who is right inside Indian CS community. >> > >> > Thus I echo with Anriette's fairly neutral, honest and constructive approach. >> > >> > Let's move on. >> > >> > Izumi >> > >> > >> > 2014年4月10日木曜日、McTimさんは書きました: >> > >> > I agree with Ian. >> > >> > These seem to be unfounded allegations. In short a smear campaign >> > with zero evidence behind it. >> > >> > "Deepening the controversy, Bhatia also appears to be particularly >> > close to one of the civil society bodies on the MAG. Media for Change >> > is a trust operated by Subi Chaturvedi, an assistant professor at >> > Delhi-based Lady Shri Ram College for women. " >> > >> > Being "particularly close" is not evidence of any wrongdoing. >> > >> > I agree with Anriette. It is also impolitic. >> > >> > -- >> > Cheers, >> > >> > McTim >> > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A >> > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:10 AM, parminder wrote: >> > > Ian >> > > >> > > Your response is well I dont know whether I should call it shocking or >> > > amusing... As the article shows, it is not about Subi but what and who is >> > > behind her. One question occurs to me to ask you and I will be happy if you >> > > respond to it. Would you have been as indifferent if you had learnt on >> > > considerable evidence that someone had been planted into the position of >> > > civil society co chair of NetMundial by say, the Iranian government? Why >> > > would a similar subversive act of US big business look any different to you, >> > > and your supporters here? >> > > >> > > parminder >> > > >> > > PS: The shocking part are the considerable allegations your email below >> > > makes about the Indian civil society groups involved and the journalist/ >> > > newspaper who wrote the article... I simply dont know what to make of your >> > > stance. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thursday 10 April 2014 12:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi Parminder, >> > > >> > > I did respond last time you posted information on this several weeks back, >> > > but let me respond again as this is escalating. >> > > >> > > Firstly, I agree with you and the Indian civil society groups that the >> > > appointment and the way it was undertaken was less than optimal. I also >> > > agree that far more experienced candidates in the area of internet >> > > governance were available – including from India, and including women from >> > > India. >> > > >> > > However, despite her inexperience in internet governance areas, Subi >> > > Chaturvedi appears to be quite active in civil society issues, particularly >> > > feminist issues. I am concerned that what is happening is that this is >> > > becoming an increasingly personal attack on a young Indian woman whose only >> > > “crime”, as far as I can see, is being ambitious. And there are plenty more >> > > of us who share that. >> > > >> > > The newspaper article clearly was written with the assistance of some civil >> > > society groups or members to discredit her. It is not regular “news”, and >> > > may or may not be accurate in all of its assertions. However, it has the >> > > elements of a personal attack. >> > > >> > > So I am personally uncomfortable with pursuing this any further, while >> > > recognising that it was important for Indian NGOs to make the initial >> > > contact with the Chair to express reservations. Someone has given less than >> > > optimal advice to the Chair, and we may not have the best civil society rep >> > > appointed, but I believe the most important thing now is not to pursue >> > > personal attacks and to work as best we can during NetMundial in the >> > > prevailing circumstances. >> > > >> > > Ian Peter >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > From: parminder >> > > Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:47 PM >> > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >> > > Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society >> > > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil >> > > society co-chair >> > > >> > > >> > > I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... >> > > >> > > this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society groups a >> > > few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India wrote >> > > a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was >> > > most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with >> > > regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the Indian >> > > civil society. >> > > >> > > Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of >> > > plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly who >> > > is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And >> > > still no response. >> > > >> > > May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net steering >> > > committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee and >> > > high level committee. >> > > >> > > At least please respond to the issue. >> > > >> > > If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what they >> > > would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil society... >> > > Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in IG >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> 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 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > “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 >> > > > > -- > “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 avri at acm.org Thu Apr 10 11:26:51 2014 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:26:51 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> Message-ID: <5346B83B.7020502@acm.org> On 10-Apr-14 10:46, Deirdre Williams wrote: > For myself I had never heard of her before the announcement and had some > difficulty finding any information. (And I do know Adam :-) ) Just to say, I had been on several panels with her in previous years and knew her as well as I know many people on the CS lists, better than I know some, and less well than others. Just did not want the meme that no one knew her to get set too firmly set. 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 williams.deirdre at gmail.com Thu Apr 10 11:30:54 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (williams.deirdre at gmail.com) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:30:54 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <5346B83B.7020502@acm.org> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> <5346B83B.7020502@acm.org> Message-ID: <1896851798-1397143880-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1153387964-@b4.c3.bise6.blackberry> Thank you Avri. Sent from my BlackBerry® device from Digicel -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria Sender: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:26:51 To: Reply-To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,Avri Doria Cc: Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair On 10-Apr-14 10:46, Deirdre Williams wrote: > For myself I had never heard of her before the announcement and had some > difficulty finding any information. (And I do know Adam :-) ) Just to say, I had been on several panels with her in previous years and knew her as well as I know many people on the CS lists, better than I know some, and less well than others. Just did not want the meme that no one knew her to get set too firmly set. 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 suresh at hserus.net Thu Apr 10 11:37:40 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 21:07:40 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <5346B83B.7020502@acm.org> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> <5346B83B.7020502@acm.org> Message-ID: <6B4E431F-233D-4EC0-A8B1-20C55957AC55@hserus.net> Good then. Just because parminder & friends haven't ever heard of her doesn't mean she isn't reasonably active in igov, from what Avri says. Thanks for pointing that out. --srs (iPad) > On 10-Apr-2014, at 20:56, Avri Doria wrote: > > > >> On 10-Apr-14 10:46, Deirdre Williams wrote: >> For myself I had never heard of her before the announcement and had some >> difficulty finding any information. (And I do know Adam :-) ) > > > Just to say, I had been on several panels with her in previous years and > knew her as well as I know many people on the CS lists, better than I > know some, and less well than others. > > Just did not want the meme that no one knew her to get set too firmly set. > > 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 ca at cafonso.ca Thu Apr 10 11:48:51 2014 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:48:51 -0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <53466846.3040208@apc.org> References: <53465BD5.303@apc.org> <53466846.3040208@apc.org> Message-ID: <5346BD63.5050508@cafonso.ca> I obviously (writing in my personal capacity, not representing anyone) agree with Anriette. I respect the internal divergences and political struggles within India, but this "war on Chaturvedi" got out of proportion, particularly because the locus of concrete decisions regarding NETmundial is *not* in the meeting's chairship. A "war", incidentally, which I did not see when she was appointed to the MAG, but then it might have happened and escaped me. As the issue seems to be recurrent now, I am really concerned our excellent and combative CS reps from India might take this as *the* issue in the scant two days we will have in Sampa. Prioritize, please! fraternal regards --c.a. On 04/10/2014 06:45 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Resending this. Seems not to have gone through earlier. > > Anriette > > ----------- > > Dear Parminder and all > > I shared the concerns expressed in the original letter from civil > society to the Chair of the NetMundial, and feel that the selection > process of the co-chairs were simply not 'solid' enough. Concerns have > been raised by some of the other co-chairs too. I think it was important > for Indian civil society to send this letter. There are many examples > when selection of non-governmental stakeholders is done in a pretty > roughshod personalised ways. It affects CS most of all, but in this case > selection of the business co-chair has also been questioned. It is an > example of the lack of maturity/clarity etc. in multi-stakeholder > processes which so many of you have discussed. > > But I believe that the point has been made, and that the best way to > move forward is to focus on the event, on civil society's voice at the > event, and on our influence on the outcomes. > > Engaging in taking this forward at this point would, I believe, put > these at risk, and possibly harm the legitimacy of the overall process. > Consider all the hard work that civil society colleagues in Brazil have > put into this event. They are working very, very hard to make it > inclusive, to get people CS to Sao Paulo, and to make sure that the > process gives everyone equal voice. > > I am not saying the process is perfect, but I think effort has been made > to keep it inclusive and transparent. This is clearly an example of > certain decisions being problematicm - this being one of them. But I > think that they have acknowledged it, and we should move on, and use > this event as the strategic opportunity I still believe it can be. > Co-chair selection should not be seen as a primary way of recognising > CS. It is pretty ceremonial. Far more important for us to look at > whether our views are reflected in the draft outcome docs. > > I also believe that continuing with this campaign will damage civil > society in other ways. It is not a constructive struggle. Attacks of a > personal nature against anyone tends to be negative and rarely have > positive outcomes. > > At this point we should be looking at the bigger picture of the > substantive issues that we want to be discussed at NetMundial. For > example, I am concerned that surveillance is getting far less focus than > it deserves to. There is just a short reference to mass surveillance in > the draft outcome doc. > > Going forward the important challenge for us is to find ways of these > processes become less adhoc in the future. > > Anriette > > > On 10/04/2014 07:47, parminder wrote: >> >> I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... >> >> this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society >> groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations >> from India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of >> NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from >> the global networks with regard to that representation, which is >> indeed disrespectful of the Indian civil society. >> >> Now, we have a newspaper report >> >> which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much >> more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as >> NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. >> >> May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net >> steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive >> committee and high level committee. >> >> At least please respond to the issue. >> >> If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what >> they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil >> society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society >> involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now >> further exacerbated by the news report >> >> in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. >> >> Thanks >> >> parminder >> >> On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> >>> Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair >>> of NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society >>> co-chair for the meeting), please find attached: >>> >>> (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >>> Virgilio Almeida, >>> (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >>> Virgilio Almeida; >>> (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. >>> >>> Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper >>> giving some of the context behind this: >>> http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx >>> >>> >>> Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning >>> plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Rishab Bailey >>> (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) >> > -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From isolatedn at gmail.com Thu Apr 10 12:02:17 2014 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 21:32:17 +0530 Subject: [governance] Message relevant to a very small proportion of List participants: from the southern region of India: NETmundial Remote Participation Hub Message-ID: List participants from the southern region of India, who prefer Chennai as a location for participation could take part from this Hub (There are five hubs in India in Total. This is about the Chennai Hub to be organized and operated by the Members of the Internet Society India Chennai) https://plus.google.com/u/0/events/c8qcjlodo83e59npikmbcsqbbcg?authkey=CJ_wlZCKtofiVQ The registration form is at page https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1P6yRl3KR0CdUliOtEQcU4LqJPmBW_zdzKxEC0NuD2a4/viewform Facebook Event page: https://www.facebook.com/events/752247164795246 Google + : https://plus.google.com/u/0/events/c8qcjlodo83e59npikmbcsqbbcg?authkey=CJ_wlZCKtofiVQ If you have friends from this region who may be interested, please share. There is a more importance purpose in looking for participants from this list: Participants familiar with the Internet Governance process and the current issues of relevance to NETmundial could offer an overview to those who are new to Internet Governance. In this hub, there are likely to be many who are new to the Internet Governance multi-stakeholder process and to the issues. Thank you Sivasubramanian M -- Sivasubramanian Muthusamy India +91 99524 03099 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Thu Apr 10 12:05:19 2014 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:05:19 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <53466846.3040208@apc.org> References: <53465BD5.303@apc.org> <53466846.3040208@apc.org> Message-ID: Very well said indeed, and unfortunately it did not go through earlier, at least to me. Kind regards, Stephanie Perrin On 2014-04-10, at 5:45 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Resending this. Seems not to have gone through earlier. > > Anriette > > ----------- > > Dear Parminder and all > > I shared the concerns expressed in the original letter from civil society to the Chair of the NetMundial, and feel that the selection process of the co-chairs were simply not 'solid' enough. Concerns have been raised by some of the other co-chairs too. I think it was important for Indian civil society to send this letter. There are many examples when selection of non-governmental stakeholders is done in a pretty roughshod personalised ways. It affects CS most of all, but in this case selection of the business co-chair has also been questioned. It is an example of the lack of maturity/clarity etc. in multi-stakeholder processes which so many of you have discussed. > > But I believe that the point has been made, and that the best way to move forward is to focus on the event, on civil society's voice at the event, and on our influence on the outcomes. > > Engaging in taking this forward at this point would, I believe, put these at risk, and possibly harm the legitimacy of the overall process. Consider all the hard work that civil society colleagues in Brazil have put into this event. They are working very, very hard to make it inclusive, to get people CS to Sao Paulo, and to make sure that the process gives everyone equal voice. > > I am not saying the process is perfect, but I think effort has been made to keep it inclusive and transparent. This is clearly an example of certain decisions being problematicm - this being one of them. But I think that they have acknowledged it, and we should move on, and use this event as the strategic opportunity I still believe it can be. Co-chair selection should not be seen as a primary way of recognising CS. It is pretty ceremonial. Far more important for us to look at whether our views are reflected in the draft outcome docs. > > I also believe that continuing with this campaign will damage civil society in other ways. It is not a constructive struggle. Attacks of a personal nature against anyone tends to be negative and rarely have positive outcomes. > > At this point we should be looking at the bigger picture of the substantive issues that we want to be discussed at NetMundial. For example, I am concerned that surveillance is getting far less focus than it deserves to. There is just a short reference to mass surveillance in the draft outcome doc. > > Going forward the important challenge for us is to find ways of these processes become less adhoc in the future. > > Anriette > > > On 10/04/2014 07:47, parminder wrote: >> >> I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... >> >> this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations from India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from the global networks with regard to that representation, which is indeed disrespectful of the Indian civil society. >> >> Now, we have a newspaper report which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. >> >> May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive committee and high level committee. >> >> At least please respond to the issue. >> >> If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now further exacerbated by the news report in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. >> >> Thanks >> >> parminder >> >> On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> >>> Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair of NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society co-chair for the meeting), please find attached: >>> >>> (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. Virgilio Almeida, >>> (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. Virgilio Almeida; >>> (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. >>> >>> Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper giving some of the context behind this: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx >>> >>> Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Rishab Bailey >>> (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) >> > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Thu Apr 10 12:11:50 2014 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 01:11:50 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <6B4E431F-233D-4EC0-A8B1-20C55957AC55@hserus.net> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> <5346B83B.7020502@acm.org> <6B4E431F-233D-4EC0-A8B1-20C55957AC55@hserus.net> Message-ID: On Apr 11, 2014, at 12:37 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Good then. Just because parminder & friends haven't ever heard of her Suresh, "parminder & friends" happen to be a very reputable group of civil society organizations with the long history of serious contributions to Internet governance dialogue. They are also a very diverse group, that they are so united in this is a suggestion that we should pay attention. Your knee seems to be jerking again. And I agree with Carlos - "Prioritize, please!" Adam > doesn't mean she isn't reasonably active in igov, from what Avri says. Thanks for pointing that out. > > --srs (iPad) > >> On 10-Apr-2014, at 20:56, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 10-Apr-14 10:46, Deirdre Williams wrote: >>> For myself I had never heard of her before the announcement and had some >>> difficulty finding any information. (And I do know Adam :-) ) >> >> >> Just to say, I had been on several panels with her in previous years and >> knew her as well as I know many people on the CS lists, better than I >> know some, and less well than others. >> >> Just did not want the meme that no one knew her to get set too firmly set. >> >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Apr 10 12:56:10 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 22:26:10 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> <5346B83B.7020502@acm.org> <6B4E431F-233D-4EC0-A8B1-20C55957AC55@hserus.net> Message-ID: There are some names there that I recognize and respect for their contributions. Others possibly less so. This was simply an exercise in pointing out the aptness of avri's statement here. If she knows this person to the extent she does, and the organizations that signed this letter do not, that is about the same as my not recognizing at least two or three out of the orgs in that group. Which I agree is knee jerk but serves to highlight, by example, what appears to be a knee jerk reaction from said group of cs orgs. --srs (iPad) > On 10-Apr-2014, at 21:41, Adam Peake wrote: > > >> On Apr 11, 2014, at 12:37 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> >> Good then. Just because parminder & friends haven't ever heard of her > > > Suresh, "parminder & friends" happen to be a very reputable group of civil society organizations with the long history of serious contributions to Internet governance dialogue. They are also a very diverse group, that they are so united in this is a suggestion that we should pay attention. Your knee seems to be jerking again. > > And I agree with Carlos - "Prioritize, please!" > > Adam > > > > >> doesn't mean she isn't reasonably active in igov, from what Avri says. Thanks for pointing that out. >> >> --srs (iPad) >> >>> On 10-Apr-2014, at 20:56, Avri Doria wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 10-Apr-14 10:46, Deirdre Williams wrote: >>>> For myself I had never heard of her before the announcement and had some >>>> difficulty finding any information. (And I do know Adam :-) ) >>> >>> >>> Just to say, I had been on several panels with her in previous years and >>> knew her as well as I know many people on the CS lists, better than I >>> know some, and less well than others. >>> >>> Just did not want the meme that no one knew her to get set too firmly set. >>> >>> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To 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 Thu Apr 10 17:35:07 2014 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 21:35:07 +0000 Subject: [governance] RE: [discuss] Wikileaks releases Penultimate NetMundial Outcome Document In-Reply-To: <5345D2C4.5070406@gmail.com> References: <53441C3F.4010005@cis-india.org> <5345D2C4.5070406@gmail.com> Message-ID: -----Original Message----- From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter > Good to know that the organisers have kindly prepared the conclusions > before the meeting. While that technique is often practiced by people > trying to avoid the inconvenience of argument and dissent, it's hardly > in the spirit of open debate and the emergence of a true consensus at the meeting itself. This, coming from someone who has been defending ICANN's attempt to rule out of scope any proposal for the IANA transition that does not serve its organizational interest? How ironic. > I would have preferred to see a draft statement of the issues as a guideline > for debate. That's what it is, actually. -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 10 18:23:27 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:23:27 -0700 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <1430C804-72AC-4848-8309-BAB3C80B8D0C@glocom.ac.jp> <5346B83B.7020502@acm.org> <6B4E431F-233D-4EC0-A8B1-20C55957AC55@hserus.net> Message-ID: <01f801cf550b$7f2005c0$7d601140$@gmail.com> Without commenting on the substance of the issues here and leaving aside issues of the suitability of Ms. Chaturvedi's appointment from a "character" perspective, something that perhaps would best be left to our Indian CS colleagues for comment; what is of particular significance to international Civil Society should be her suitability from a "political" perspective. Her evident ties to the corporate sector combined with the murky process of her nomination/appointment as co-Chair of the event without apparent consultation or evident deep ties to or extensive experience in the CS community casts further shadows on the overall legitimacy of the NetMundial multistakeholder process and its outcomes. M -----Original Message----- From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Adam Peake Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 9:12 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Suresh Ramasubramanian Cc: Avri Doria; Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair On Apr 11, 2014, at 12:37 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Good then. Just because parminder & friends haven't ever heard of her Suresh, "parminder & friends" happen to be a very reputable group of civil society organizations with the long history of serious contributions to Internet governance dialogue. They are also a very diverse group, that they are so united in this is a suggestion that we should pay attention. Your knee seems to be jerking again. And I agree with Carlos - "Prioritize, please!" Adam > doesn't mean she isn't reasonably active in igov, from what Avri says. Thanks for pointing that out. > > --srs (iPad) > >> On 10-Apr-2014, at 20:56, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 10-Apr-14 10:46, Deirdre Williams wrote: >>> For myself I had never heard of her before the announcement and had >>> some difficulty finding any information. (And I do know Adam :-) ) >> >> >> Just to say, I had been on several panels with her in previous years >> and knew her as well as I know many people on the CS lists, better >> than I know some, and less well than others. >> >> Just did not want the meme that no one knew her to get set too firmly set. >> >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 jfcallo at ciencitec.com Thu Apr 10 19:01:33 2014 From: jfcallo at ciencitec.com (jfcallo at ciencitec.com) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 23:01:33 +0000 Subject: [governance] NetMundial funding - information requested In-Reply-To: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> References: <533FCF01.30201@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20140410230133.Horde.HU-WcIY9Wq6yWivKfG9mhw1@www.ciencitec.com> Parminder: Interesante hecho. Quien le escribe, es un activista de Internet. Fundador de ISOC, Capitulo de Peru (Capitulo que no ha renovado su Directiva, pues quienm se arroga la presidencia se ha apropiado y es importante que sepa la Comunidad de Internet). En efecto, ¿cual es el criterio para una Beca de las Organizaciones?. Por ejmplo muchas veces a pesar de garantizar replicar los acuerdos, diversificar lo aprendido, he postulado miles de ves a una Beca en LACNIC y veo en la lista que las Becas, siempre la ganan los mismos, un circulo de "amigos" que habla de masificación, desterrar la Brecha Digital, Governanza en Internet...¿un grupito es el que va a cambiar esto?. ¿saben las entidades que financian esto? lo que sucede cuando entregan su dinero para causas nobles y una casta la disfruta. Es importante que se de a conocer algo como esto. No mas puertas cerradas y "conciliabulos". Espero que lo pueda replicar en su idioma (English), pues no lo domino bien y pueda decir una cosa por otra. Gracias Atentamente José F. Callo Romero Comunicador Digital Organizador: www.internautaperu.org parminder escribió: > Someone who is not in these civil society circles, and who had > sought funding support on registering for NetMundial, asked me > information about how funding support works. Since I am not able to > help that person with this information, may I request those involved > with the meeting to provide it. Please note that this is urgent. > (The concerned person has received an email from ICANN informing him > that ICANN would support her/his travel for the meeting.) > > It will be useful to know full details about how the funding process > worked. Was there a pool of donations? Who picked up the > participants who were offered funding? What kind of criteria was > used? Why individual funders are approaching participants with > funding support, and why a centralised approach from the meeting > organisers was not made/ considered? Whether there are other > funders too making such a direct approach? Who are the funders and > what amounts have been committed? > > If say an Internet company was to approach a civil society > participant declaring that it will fund her/ his travel, it could > create a potential problem because many civil society groups have > limitations on what kind of funding for travel etc they can accept > from private companies, especially those who work in their own > activity area , and under what conditions. > > I request early information on the above since the person who has > asked for this information and her/his organisation needs to make an > early decision about accepting the funding, given the short period > to the meeting. > > Thanks > > parminder > > PS: It is not a personal gripe because two persons from IT for > Change have been offered support in a similar way and we have > accepted it. -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 10 20:04:46 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 17:04:46 -0700 Subject: [governance] FW: LDC's Turning Backs on Multistakeholder Trade Agreements In-Reply-To: <024c01cf5519$11a3bb00$34eb3100$@gmail.com> References: <024c01cf5519$11a3bb00$34eb3100$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <026301cf5519$a7068740$f51395c0$@gmail.com> These “Investor Treaties” are the trade equivalent of multistakeholder governance processes in that they give the private sector equal rights with governments in determining the contents of sectoral trade agreements. M From: sid-l at googlegroups.com [mailto:sid-l at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sid Shniad Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 12:17 PM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: Investor Treaties in Trouble http://us5.campaign-archive2.com/?u=fa9cf38799136b5660f367ba6 &id=3990f710bb&e=3f7d5d14f1 SOUTHNEWS No. 52, 10 April 2014 SOUTHNEWS is a service of the South Centre to provide information and news on topical issues from a South perspective. Visit the South Centre’s website: www.southcentre.int. Investor Treaties in Trouble By Martin Khor The tide is turning against investment treaties and free trade agreements that contain the controversial investor-state dispute system, as countries like Indonesia and Germany take action on this. The tide is turning against investment treaties that allow foreign investors to take up cases against host governments and claim compensation of up to billions of dollars. Indonesia has given notice to it will terminate its bilateral investment treaty (BIT) with the Netherlands, according to a statement issued by the Dutch Embassy in Jakarta last week. “The Indonesian Government has also mentioned it intends to terminate all of its 67 bilateral investment treaties”, according to the same statement. The Dutch statement has not been confirmed by Indonesia. But if this is correct, Indonesia joins South Africa, which last year announced it is ending all its BITS. Several other countries are also reviewing their investment treaties. This is prompted by increasing numbers of cases being brought against governments by foreign companies who claim that changes in government policies or contracts affect their future profits. Many countries have been asked to pay large compensations to companies under the treaties. The biggest claim was against Ecuador, which has to compensate an American oil company US$ 2.3 billion for cancelling a contract. The system empowering investors to sue governments in an international tribunal, thus bypassing national laws and courts, is a subject of controversy in Malaysia because it is part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) which the country is negotiating with 11 other countries. The investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system is contained in free trade agreements (especially those involving the United States) and also in BITS which countries sign among themselves to protect foreign investors’ rights. When these treaties containing ISDS were signed, many countries did not know they were opening themselves to legal cases that foreign investors can take up under loosely worded provisions that allow them to win cases where they claim they have not been treated fairly or that there expected revenues have been expropriated. Indonesia and South Africa are among many countries that faced such cases. The Indonesian government has been taken to the ICSID tribunal based in Washington by a British company, Churchill Mining, which claimed the government violated the UK-Indonesia BIT when its contract with a local government in East Kalimantan was cancelled. Reports indicate the company is claiming compensation of US$ 1 billion to US$ 2 billion in losses. This and other cases taken against Indonesia prompted the government to review whether it should retain its many BITS. South Africa had also been sued by a British mining company which claimed losses after the government introduced policies to boost the economic capacity of the blacks to redress apartheid policies. India is also reviewing its BITS, after many companies filed cases after the Supreme Court cancelled their 2G mobile communications licenses in the wake of a high-profile corruption scandal linked to the granting of the licenses. But it is not only developing countries that are getting disillusioned by the ISDS. Europe is getting cold feet over the investor-state dispute mechanism in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) it is negotiating with the US, similar to the mechanism in the TPPA. Several weeks ago, Germany told the European Commission that the TTIP must not have the investor-state dispute mechanism. Brigitte Zypries, an economy minister, told the German parliament that Berlin was determined to exclude arbitration rights from the TTIP deal, according to the Financial Times. “From the perspective of the [German] federal government, US investors in the EU have sufficient legal protection in the national courts,” she said. The French trade minister had earlier voiced opposition to ISDS, while a report commissioned by the United Kingdom government also pointed out problems with the mechanism. The European disillusionment has two causes. ISDS cases are also affecting the countries. Germany has been taken to ICSID by a Swedish company Vattenfall which claimed it suffered over a billion euros in losses resulting from the government’s decision to phase out nuclear power after the Fukushima disaster. And the European public is getting upset over the investment system. Two European organisations last year published a report showing how the international investment arbitration system is monopolised by a few big law firms, how the tribunals are riddled with conflicts of interest and the arbitrary nature of tribunal decisions. That report caused shockwaves not only in the civil society but also among European policy makers. In January, the European Commission suspended negotiations with the US on the ISDS provisions in the TTIP, and announced it would hold 90 days of consultations with the public over the issue. In Australia, the previous government decided it would not have an ISDS clause in its future FTAs and BITS, following a case taken against it by Philip Morris International which claimed loss of profits because of laws requiring only plain packaging on cigarette boxes. In Malaysia, the ISDS is one of the major controversial issues relating to the TPPA. Many business, professional and public-interest groups want the government to exclude the ISDS as a “red line” in the TPPA negotiations. Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Najib Tun Razak had also mentioned investment policy and ISDS as one of the issues (the others being government procurement and state owned enterprises) in the TTPA that may impinge on national sovereignty, when he was at the APEC Summit and TPPA Summit in Indonesia last year. So far the United States has stuck to its position that ISDS has to be part of the TPPA and TTIP. However if the emerging European opposition affects the TTIP negotiations, it could affect the TPPA as this would strengthen the position of those opposed to ISDS. Meanwhile, we can also expect more countries to review their BITS. Developing countries seeking to end their bilateral agreements with European countries can point to the fact that more and more European countries are themselves having second thoughts about the ISDS embedded in these agreements. Author: Martin Khor is the Executive Director of the South Centre. Contact: director at southcentre.int. To view other articles in SouthNews, please click here. For more information, please contact Vicente Paolo Yu of the South Centre: Email yu at southcentre.int, or telephone +41 22 791 80 50 . -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sid-l" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sid-l+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. !DSPAM:2676,5346ee1c215691981217163! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Fri Apr 11 08:35:01 2014 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 14:35:01 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> McTim wrote: > These seem to be unfounded allegations. In short a smear campaign > with zero evidence behind it. For what it's worth, I was in India in mid-February at a civil society meeting focused on Internet governance, shortly after the appointment of Subi Chaturvedi was announced. While it of course doesn't say too much that a European like myself didn't know who she was, it in my view says a lot that most of the Indians who were there didn't know who she was either, and it seemed that the few who had first-hand knowledge of her were outraged (considering her an "AT&T plant"). In my opinion, the one main benefit of multistakeholder processes is to allow those perspectives and viewpoints and concerns to be fully and duly taken into consideration for which this would not happen in other types of policy processes, because most perspectives and viewpoints and concerns don't enjoy the support of a powerful lobby. Nota bene I'm not claiming that this benefit arises automatically in any kind of multistakeholder process. Quite on the contrary, we need to carefully design the future of governance in regard to any particular subject matter area, in order to make sure to achieve this benefit while at the same time also ensuring that fundamental principles such as democracy, primacy of human rights, etc, are not violated. Now in regard to Netmundial, which is aimed at trying to move us a step forward in figuring out this future of governance, it is in my opinion absolutely essential that any "civil society" appointment to a key role, such as "civil society co-chair", must be someone who not only has ambitions and some claim of being a member of civil society, but someone with a track record of working to get those perspectives and viewpoints and concerns which not always heard fully and duly taken into consideration. This can't be done without becoming reasonably well-known among other civil society groups as part of that process!!! Hence my conclusion is that the lack of any obvious track-record of the kind of work outlined above is pretty damning evidence in itself. If her appointment to this role at Netmundial is not reconsidered, that in itself will, in my eyes at least, very seriously undermine any claim of legitimacy of Netmundial as a whole. Greetings, Norbert P.S. Cc list trimmed, in order to minimize crossposting. -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net Fri Apr 11 08:51:31 2014 From: jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net (Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 14:51:31 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> Message-ID: +1 JC Le 11 avr. 2014 à 14:35, Norbert Bollow a écrit : > McTim wrote: > >> These seem to be unfounded allegations. In short a smear campaign >> with zero evidence behind it. > > For what it's worth, I was in India in mid-February at a civil society > meeting focused on Internet governance, shortly after the appointment > of Subi Chaturvedi was announced. While it of course doesn't say too > much that a European like myself didn't know who she was, it in my > view says a lot that most of the Indians who were there didn't know who > she was either, and it seemed that the few who had first-hand knowledge > of her were outraged (considering her an "AT&T plant"). > > In my opinion, the one main benefit of multistakeholder processes is to > allow those perspectives and viewpoints and concerns to be fully and > duly taken into consideration for which this would not happen in other > types of policy processes, because most perspectives and viewpoints and > concerns don't enjoy the support of a powerful lobby. > > Nota bene I'm not claiming that this benefit arises automatically in > any kind of multistakeholder process. Quite on the contrary, we need to > carefully design the future of governance in regard to any particular > subject matter area, in order to make sure to achieve this benefit > while at the same time also ensuring that fundamental principles such as > democracy, primacy of human rights, etc, are not violated. > > Now in regard to Netmundial, which is aimed at trying to move us a step > forward in figuring out this future of governance, it is in my opinion > absolutely essential that any "civil society" appointment to a key > role, such as "civil society co-chair", must be someone who not only > has ambitions and some claim of being a member of civil society, but > someone with a track record of working to get those perspectives and > viewpoints and concerns which not always heard fully and duly taken into > consideration. This can't be done without becoming reasonably > well-known among other civil society groups as part of that process!!! > > Hence my conclusion is that the lack of any obvious track-record of > the kind of work outlined above is pretty damning evidence in itself. > > If her appointment to this role at Netmundial is not reconsidered, that > in itself will, in my eyes at least, very seriously undermine any claim > of legitimacy of Netmundial as a whole. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > P.S. Cc list trimmed, in order to minimize crossposting. > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Fri Apr 11 09:47:03 2014 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:47:03 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> Message-ID: On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > McTim wrote: > > > Hence my conclusion is that the lack of any obvious track-record of > the kind of work outlined above is pretty damning evidence in itself. and being on the MAG isn't a 'track record"? Seriously? -- 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 ngreen260 at gmail.com Fri Apr 11 10:30:04 2014 From: ngreen260 at gmail.com (Natalie Green) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 10:30:04 -0400 Subject: [governance] Open Tech Institute: How The DOTCOM Act Could Endanger Rather Than Protect Internet Freedom Message-ID: Apologies for cross-posting http://oti.newamerica.net/blogposts/2014/how_the_dotcom_act_could_endanger_rather_than_protect_internet_freedom-107817 -- Natalie Green *Program Associate, **Internet Freedom and Human Rights Program* Open Technology Institute New America Foundation 202-986-2700 ext. 3609 green at newamerica.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 Fri Apr 11 10:38:18 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:08:18 +0530 Subject: [governance] Initial response of Just Net Coalition to the leaked NetMUndial draft Message-ID: <5347FE5A.2020509@itforchange.net> Please find as below, and enclosed... /*Initial response of Just Net Coalition to the early draft of NetMundial outcome document*/ 11th April, 2014 We commend the NetMundial process for its openness in inviting, receiving and reviewing submissions from the range of public interest actors as well as private interest ones. We thank the Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) for developing the first draft of their report which we had the opportunity to access through wikileaks and on which we would like to comment in advance of the finalized report. We think that the EMC has made a sincere effort to combine the various inputs into a coherent whole and the resulting draft provides some useful elements. We must observe however that the inputs cannot be viewed as being truly representative of the totality of Internet users, much less of the totality of the world’s population which should benefit from the Internet, because the there is a great dis-balance in terms of groups and constituencies that have contributed inputs. We especially note positively the mention of the 'necessary and proportionate' principles for surveillance practices and the need for an international treaty to deal with jurisdictional issues, cyber crime and to restrain cyber weapons. We also commend the recommendations on open and inclusive IG processes at all level, particularly the inclusion of participation of all interested actors. Having said this, we must express our dissatisfaction with the current document as having largely failed to meet the high expectations of a new start that the world community had placed on the NetMundial meeting. That high expectation was not necessarily to achieve full consensus: we know that many issues are contentious. The expectation was that there would be a full and open airing of the issues, with frank and robust discussions. Reading between the lines, it is clear that the document effectively endorses the current Internet Governance status quo along with suggestions for minor changes. While being able to present substantially new proposals for change may have been difficult at such short notice, sadly we see the document as not even opening up new directions, and in fact perhaps closing down some that are currently being discussed in other places. In our view, the document avoids dealing with contentious issues. We believe that it is essential that the existence of such contentious issues be openly acknowledged, in particular since some of those issues have been under discussion for years and are of fundamental importance. The document does not contain any forwarding looking proposals for addressing the absence of any means or mechanisms at the global level that could democratically address the urgent and important public policy issues that currently face the global community. Further the document fails even to appropriately frame the problem. In this sense it represents a retreat from the Tunis Agenda – which is surprising, since during the 10 years since the Tunis agenda was written the the global importance of public policy issues pertaining to the Internet has only exponentially increased in importance. It is noteworthy that the Tunis agenda is referred to only once in the whole document, and in that instance as indicating quite incorrectly that that the Tunis Agenda has been implemented: “The implementation of the Tunis Agenda has demonstrated the value of the Multistakeholder model in Internet governance.” Such a statement, suggesting closure on Tunis Agenda, is really surprising especially when there is a UN working Group that is currently mandated to develop recommendations to 'fully implement Tunis Agenda' especially with regard to the key issue of addressing Internet-related public policy issues. After saying that mechanisms may be needed to address 'emerging' public policy issues (using the unfortunate term 'orphan issues' which gives a kind of 'residual' status to one of the most significant set of global public policy issues) the draft veers towards recommending (1) Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as the principal site for addressing of these issue (although in a bit apologetic and round about language) and (2) improving information flows between existing fora dealing with Internet-related public policy issues. While some believe that IGF needs to be strengthened as a global policy dialogue space, and that all kinds of information flows between concerned institutions enhanced, this recipe for 'institutional reform' basically just rubber stamps the status quo of global Internet governance. This approach would mean that there would continue to be no global policy mechanisms to respond to the range of issues that have and are emerging globally concerning the impact of the Internet in economic restructuring and in helping to ameliorate the extreme concentrations of economic, social, cultural and geo-political controls that are emerging on and through the global Internet. The current draft completely fails at its central task, which is to give direction for responding to the principal problem facing the world today: how to channel the extremely powerful forces of the Internet into the support of the public good. It is this that we and many others believe to be the central challenge and opportunity for the NetMundial meeting. The second major issue with the current document is that while it refers repeatedly to “multistakeholderism” and “stakeholders” as providing the frameworks for Internet Governance nowhere does it mention democracy or how multistakeholderism might contribute to or enhance the fundamental elements of democracy on which so much of human rights Internet freedom and social justice are based. This is truly alarming given the stridency with which so many actors are attempting to ensure that those pursuing private interests and the corporate sector have an equal role with those legitimately representing the public interest in the determination of public policy. It must be remembered that the Tunis Agenda repeatedly speaks of 'democratic (processes)' when referring to global Internet governance. Omission of this primary political norm from the NetMndial text is therefore highly objectionable and completely unacceptable. The document must therefore underline that 1. while the formulation of technical standards and technical coordination activities may most effectively be undertaken through an “equal footing of all stakeholders”, there is no basis for extending such a formulation or such mechanisms beyond the technical into broader areas of public policy decision making 2. whereas all stakeholders should be able to freely input into public policy making processes, and even have a right to know how their inputs were considered, the right to make the final decisions on public policies rests with legitimate public interest actors that hold political responsibilities arising from formal democratic processes (this was also the process followed for the famous 'Marco Civil' legislation, and there can and should be no other kind of process for legitimate public policy making) . While the draft document mentions the 'respective roles and responsibilities' of stakeholders in two places, these references are mitigated through questionable language in many other places in the document. The document should therefore clearly declare that MSism outside of the technical sphere is only operative within and as a contributor to the more fundamental democratic framework, and as well the term democratic should in all places be used in conjunction with the multistakeholder terminology. As the document calls for further discussions on 'respective roles and responsibilities' it should also be mentioned that such a discussion should take place within a larger discussion and debate on the relationship between democracy and MSism. Specifically, one new item should be added to the Human Rights catalog under II on page 3: “Democracy: everyone shall have the right and opportunity to take part in the conduct of public affairs and public policy decisions, directly or through freely chosen representatives.” A third issue with the current draft is the almost total neglect of global Internet-related public policy issues of an economic, social and cultural nature. While development and cultural diversity is mentioned in the context of “Internet principles”, there is nothing concerning key global public policy issues of this nature on the operations part, which though, admirably, does talk about global agreements on surveillance and cyber peace. As the Internet increasingly determines the global distribution of economic, social and cultural resources, we need global mechanisms to deal with the emerging distortions in such distribution. It was hoped that with a developing country taking the lead for the first time in steering a global IG discussion, such issues would come to the fore, not only in terms of statements of concerns, but also in terms of actual proposals for addressing them. The draft document needs significant improvement in this regard. (Also, a full mention of the term 'net neutrality' is needed and not just a reference to 'neutrality' which can be interpreted in different ways.) Recognition of the Internet as a public good and a global commons must be stated as a primary principle underlying various Internet related public policies. Further, even on issues such as democratization of technical coordination functions and their oversight, the document does not go beyond what has recently been declared by the US government and as is being pursued by ICANN. There is a need to discuss – without any preconditions – what kind of structure is most appropriate for managing the DNS and other critical Internet resources. We must for instance affirm the need for freeing such technical coordination functions from the jurisdiction of any one country, and the simultaneous need for appropriate oversight of these functions by the global community. **Specifically, the following should be added at the end of the second paragraph of 4 of III, on page 9, add: “The operational aspects must not be subject to the law of any one country, that is, they must benefit from immunity of jurisdiction.” Given the limited time to evaluate and study this document, we are of the view that it should not be endorsed or approved at the meeting, it should be noted. It will then provide a useful input for further discussions. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JustNet initial response.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 68034 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 parminder at itforchange.net Fri Apr 11 11:50:34 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 21:20:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Other News - Developing Nations Seek U.N. Retaliation on Bank Cancellations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <53480F4A.5060400@itforchange.net> A news that needs to be read closely for those discussing ICANN's internationalisation.... parminder > *Developing Nations Seek U.N. Retaliation on Bank Cancellations* > ** > */By Thalif Deen/* > UNITED NATIONS, Apr 2014 (IPS) - The 132-member Group of 77, the > largest single coalition of developing nations, has urged > Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to provide, "as soon as > possible...alternative options for banking services" in New York City > following the mass cancellation of bank accounts of U.N. missions and > foreign diplomats. > The draft resolution, a copy of which was obtained by IPS, is an > "agreed text" which has the blessings of all 132 countries, plus China. > Responding to a demand by member states for reciprocal retaliation, > the G77 requests the secretary-general to review the "U.N. > Secretariat's financial relations with the JP Morgan Chase Bank and > consider alternatives to such financial institutions and to report > thereon, along with the information requested." > Currently, the bank handles billions of dollars in the accounts > maintained by the United Nations and its agencies in New York City. > The Group expresses "deep concern" over the decisions made by several > banking institutions, including JP Morgan Chase, in closing bank > accounts of mostly developing countries, and diplomats accredited to > the United Nations and their relatives. > The resolution, which is subject to amendments, cites the 1947 U.S.- > U.N. headquarters agreement that "guarantees the rights, obligations > and the fulfillment of responsibilities by member states towards the > United Nations, under the United Nations Charter and international law." > Additionally, it cites the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic > Relations as a regulatory framework for states and international > organisations, in particular the working relationship between the > United Nations and the City of New York. > Citing the two agreements, the G77 is calling for all "necessary > measures to ensure permanent missions accredited to the United Nations > and their staff are granted equal, fair and non-discriminatory > treatment by the banking system." > Asked for an official response, U.N. Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric > told IPS: "We would not comment on a draft resolution." > At a closed-door meeting of the G77 last month, speaker after speaker > lambasted banks in the city for selectively cutting off the banking > system from the diplomatic community, describing the action as > "outrageous". > Their anger was directed mostly at JP Morgan Chase (formerly Chemical > bank) which was once considered part of the U.N. family -- and a > preferred bank by most diplomats -- and at one time was housed in the > secretariat building. > The G77 is expected to hold consultations with member states outside > the Group, specifically Western nations, before tabling the resolution > with the 193-member General Assembly later this month. > If any proposed amendments are aimed at weakening the resolution, the > G77 will go for a vote in the Assembly with its agreed text, a G77 > diplomat told IPS Thursday. > But with the Group having more than two-thirds majority in the > Assembly, the resolution is expected to be adopted either with or > without the support of Western nations. > If adopted by a majority vote, the secretary-general is expected to > abide by the resolution and respond to its demands. > The draft resolution also requests the secretary-general to review and > report to the General Assembly, within 120 days of its adoption, "of > any obstacles or impediments observed in the accounts of permanent > missions or their staff at the JP Morgan Chase Bank in the City of New > York, and the impact these impediments have on the adequate > functioning of their offices." > And to this end, the G77 invites all members to provide the > secretary-general with relevant information that will facilitate the > elaboration of such report. > In an appeal to the United States, the G77 has also underscored the > importance of the host country taking the necessary measures to ensure > that personal data and information of persons affected by the closure > of accounts is kept confidential by banking institutions, and requests > the secretary-general to work with the host country in that regard and > to report to the General Assembly within 90 days. > The closure of accounts was triggered by a request from the U.S. > treasury, which wanted all banks to meticulously report every single > transaction of some 70 "blacklisted" U.N. diplomatic missions, and > individual diplomats -- perhaps as part of a monitoring system to > prevent money laundering and terrorism financing. > But the banks have said such an elaborate exercise is administratively > expensive and cumbersome. > And as a convenient alternative, they have closed down, or are in the > process of closing down, all accounts, shutting off banks from the > diplomatic community in New York. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Fri Apr 11 12:03:59 2014 From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 18:03:59 +0200 Subject: [governance] NETmundial / Neelie Kroes: My thoughts on NETmundial and the Future of Internet Governance Message-ID: [ Apologies if you receive this message multiple times ] Dear all, you might be interested to read the recent blog post of Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission and member of the High-Level Multistakeholder Committee of NETmundial, available at https://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kroes/en/content/my-thoughts-netmundial-and-future-internet-governanceand reproduced below. My thoughts on NETmundial and the Future of Internet Governance Published by Neelie KROESon Friday, 11/04/2014 As the European Commission clearly stated in its Communication on Internet Policy and Governanceof 12 February 2014, conflicting visions on the future of the Internet and on how to strengthen its multistakeholder governance in a sustainable manner have intensified recently. The next two years will be critical in redrawing the global map of Internet governance. Europe must contribute to finding a credible way forward for global internet governance; it must play a strong role in defining how the internet is run and ensuring it remains a single, un-fragmented network. In less than two weeks, I will be travelling to Sao Paulo to attend NETmundial, the Multi-stakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance. The purpose of NETmundial is to develop principles of Internet governance and a roadmap for the future development of this ecosystem. This international conference comes at a very timely moment in the debates on Internet governance and I commend the Brazilian government, and in particular President Dilma Rousseff, for taking this important initiative. I was very pleased that the Brazilian Government asked me to join the High-Level Multi-stakeholder Committee of NETmundial , which oversees the overall strategy of the meeting and fosters the involvement of the international community. The members of the High-Level Multi-stakeholder Committee recently received a "draft outcome document", prepared on the basis of the more than 180 comments and submissions (including two submissionsby the European Commission) to the conference. A public consultation on the outcome documentis going to be launched by the conference organisers very shortly. In the meantime, I shared my observations on this draft document with my colleagues in the High-Level Multi-Stakeholder Committee, the co-chairs of the drafting team and with the secretariat of the conference; in a spirit of transparency, I would like to also share them with the broader Internet community. ++++++++ *From:* * KROES Neelie (CAB-KROES)Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 7:26 PMTo: 'hlmc at netmundial.br 'Subject: RE: [HLMC] NETmundial draft outcome document* *Dear colleagues,* *I read with great interest the "draft outcome document" for NETmundial prepared by the Executive Meeting Committee (EMC). I would like to thank the members of the EMC and the colleagues who supported them for the hard work that went into drafting the document in such a short amount of time.* *On behalf of the European Commission, I would like to share with you a number of observations and considerations, which I trust will be useful as we move forward towards meeting each other in Sao Paulo in two weeks' time.* *It is in my view absolutely essential that we make a collective effort to ensure that the final outcomes of NETmundial are concrete and actionable, with clear milestones and with a realistic but ambitious timeline. As I had the occasion to underline throughout my tenure as EU Commissioner for the Digital Agenda and responsible for EU Internet governance policies - and as the European Commission clearly asserted in our recent Communication on Internet Policy and Governance - I strongly believe that we need to put on the table an evolutionary but concrete agenda for addressing the limitations - whether real or perceived - of the current multi-stakeholder model for the governance of the Internet.* *In this sense, I regret to say that I find the draft outcome document too abstract and vague when it comes to the proposed roadmap. I understand the challenges that the EMC had to face in summarising the many contributions that were submitted, and I trust my remarks will be taken as a constructive contribution; but I am convinced this outcome document, as it stands, will be interpreted as putting off necessary discussions - in particular by those who have different opinion as to the value and effectiveness of the multi-stakeholder model.* *To be clear, I am not arguing that all substantive issues should be "solved" in Sao Paulo. This is neither the purpose of the meeting nor a realistic achievement to plan for, and indeed we need to have a targeted number of issues to address over the two days. However, NETmundial should definitively mark a significant "change of pace" in the discussions and deliberations that have taken place so far. My own experience in public service suggests that a necessary condition to achieve such objective is to start from a substantially more ambitious point of departure than is currently the case.* *There are a few other observations on the draft outcome document that I would like to make at this point in time.* *First of all, I found some of the language related to human rights unnecessarily weak. I refer in particular to the passage "Internet governance should be open, participatory, Multistakeholder, technology-neutral, sensitive to human rights". We have an obligation to respect and promote human rights, not merely be "sensitive" to them, and this should be clearly reflected throughout the outcome document. This includes, among a number of important issues, the protection of privacy and personal data protection, which should have a prominent role in the outcome document.* *Secondly, self-regulation and self-organisation of different stakeholders are certainly to be preserved and promoted. However, this cannot be to the detriment of basic democratic principles. It is not sufficient that the mechanisms through which "different stakeholder groups [...] self-manage their processes [are] based on publicly known mechanisms", if this results in the explicit or implicit exclusion of persons in a manner that would contradict democratic processes.* *Thirdly, I am glad that the draft outcome document recognises the importance of distributed institutional models for Internet governance, avoiding centralised solutions as a default. This is very much in line with the position of the European Commission that stronger interactions between stakeholders involved in Internet governance should be fostered via cross-cutting, issue-based dialogues, instead of through new bodies. This would allow relevant stakeholders to address specific challenges across structural and organisational boundaries. Such arrangements should be inspired by the distributed architecture of the Internet which should serve as a model for better interactions between all parties.* *In this light, let me underline that in order for such distributed models to truly work, especially for people, organisations and countries with fewer resources to devote to this policy area, it is absolutely essential that the right ICT tools are globally available. The draft outcome document does refer to this, in particular in regard to remote participation in meetings and discussions. I believe we should be more ambitious and look more carefully at the role that ICTs, including Big Data technologies, can play in this context. The European Commission is addressing this challenge via the Global Internet Policy Observatory (GIPO) initiative. I would be glad to share further details and explore how we could join forces in this endeavour, possibly as a concrete deliverable of NETmundial.* *Fourthly, I cannot stress enough how important it is that we keep the momentum towards a real and effective globalisation of core Internet functions and decisions. This is perhaps one of the most essential conditions to satisfy if we want the multi-stakeholder model for Internet governance to be seen as truly legitimate across the world. I have already had the occasion to congratulate the United States Government for its announcement of 14 March 2014, concerning the globalisation of certain IANA functions; I am therefore pleased that the draft outcome document specifically mentions the globalisation of both IANA and ICANN. I want nonetheless to underline that any such movement towards further globalisation of Internet processes should firmly and explicitly keep the public interest as a primary condition.* *I appreciate that the EMC in its proposal has tried to take maximum account of the contributions received. However, I think that the conference should not overextend the areas it wants to cover meaningfully. * *I am not convinced, for example, that the outcome document should or indeed needs to touch upon issues such as "network neutrality" and the liability of Internet intermediaries. Both are certainly very important issues in the overall debate on an open Internet, but are the subject of detailed discussions elsewhere. * *On Net Neutrality for example, legislators of the European Union are at this very moment engaged in a democratic debate on the "Connected Continent" proposal by the European Commission. I understand a similar debate is taking place in Brazil, on the "Marco Civil". We should not be seen as prejudging the outcome of a democratic procedure on such sensitive topics. * *As regards the topic of the liability of intermediaries, I believe there is no added value in referring, via potentially contentious language, to an issue which has extensively been debated in many different settings and democratic fora and has in some cases been enshrined in legislation, as is the case of the European Union. * *I trust the above observations will be taken with the same constructive spirit with which I wrote them. I am looking forward to meeting all of you in Sao Paulo.* *Yours sincerely,* *Neelie Kroes* *Vice-President of the European Commission"* Best regards, -- 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Fri Apr 11 12:16:21 2014 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 18:16:21 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> Message-ID: <20140411181621.65d5b9df@quill> Am Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:47:03 -0400 schrieb McTim : > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > McTim wrote: > > > > > > > Hence my conclusion is that the lack of any obvious track-record of > > the kind of work outlined above is pretty damning evidence in > > itself. > > and being on the MAG isn't a 'track record"? > > Seriously? Last I checked the "M" in "MAG" stood for "Multistakeholder", so why would being on the MAG qualify someone to represent civil society at the "stakeholder group co-chair" level of Netmundial??? Well if Subi had been proposed/nominated by a reputable civil society body to serve there as a "civil society representative", that'd be something that could be considered as part of the kind of track record that I was talking about. But to my best knowledge that wasn't the case. 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 gurstein at gmail.com Fri Apr 11 12:41:45 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:41:45 -0700 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <20140411181621.65d5b9df@quill> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> <20140411181621.65d5b9df@quill> Message-ID: <071001cf55a4$ed3191c0$c794b540$@gmail.com> The issue of "personal" vs. "political" still stands. The question is who put her on/nominated her for the MAG and for what purpose... It clearly wasn't CS as she wasn't nominated by any of the conventional CS processes and to the best of my knowledge no alternative CS process has come forward to acknowledge them having nominated her... M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 9:16 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair Am Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:47:03 -0400 schrieb McTim : > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > McTim wrote: > > > > > > > Hence my conclusion is that the lack of any obvious track-record of > > the kind of work outlined above is pretty damning evidence in > > itself. > > and being on the MAG isn't a 'track record"? > > Seriously? Last I checked the "M" in "MAG" stood for "Multistakeholder", so why would being on the MAG qualify someone to represent civil society at the "stakeholder group co-chair" level of Netmundial??? Well if Subi had been proposed/nominated by a reputable civil society body to serve there as a "civil society representative", that'd be something that could be considered as part of the kind of track record that I was talking about. But to my best knowledge that wasn't the case. 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 nb at bollow.ch Fri Apr 11 13:42:55 2014 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 19:42:55 +0200 Subject: [governance] NETmundial / Neelie Kroes: My thoughts on NETmundial and the Future of Internet Governance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20140411194255.5b2805d2@quill> Andrea Glorioso wrote: > you might be interested to read the recent blog post of Neelie Kroes, > Vice-President of the European Commission and member of the High-Level > Multistakeholder Committee of NETmundial, available at > https://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kroes/en/content/my-thoughts-netmundial-and-future-internet-governanceand actually it's https://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kroes/en/content/my-thoughts-netmundial-and-future-internet-governance Anyway I'm very positively impressed. I particularly appreciate the emphasis on strengthening the Netmundial outcome document in regard to the role that human rights need to play and in regard to the need for Internet related governance decisions to be made in ways that do not contradict democracy. The point about not putting off certain important discussions is also good and very well-stated, IMO. 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 kichango at gmail.com Fri Apr 11 14:52:51 2014 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 18:52:51 +0000 Subject: [governance] NETmundial / Neelie Kroes: My thoughts on NETmundial and the Future of Internet Governance In-Reply-To: <20140411194255.5b2805d2@quill> References: <20140411194255.5b2805d2@quill> Message-ID: I'm also positively impressed with her concise and result- and action-oriented take on NETmundial, with a clear vision and a decisive tone. The good thing is that presumably many others will notice, too. Now, Andrea, where are you guys at with the GIPO project? Will you have aomething to show at NETmundial as she seems to imply? Thanks, Mawaki ===================================== Mawaki Chango, PhD Founder and Owner DIGILEXIS Consulting m.chango at digilexis.com | http://www.digilexis.com Twitter: @digilexis | @dig_mawaki | Skype: digilexis ====================================== On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Andrea Glorioso wrote: > > > you might be interested to read the recent blog post of Neelie Kroes, > > Vice-President of the European Commission and member of the High-Level > > Multistakeholder Committee of NETmundial, available at > > > https://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kroes/en/content/my-thoughts-netmundial-and-future-internet-governanceand > > actually it's > > > https://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kroes/en/content/my-thoughts-netmundial-and-future-internet-governance > > Anyway I'm very positively impressed. > > I particularly appreciate the emphasis on strengthening the Netmundial > outcome document in regard to the role that human rights need to play > and in regard to the need for Internet related governance decisions > to be made in ways that do not contradict democracy. The point about not > putting off certain important discussions is also good and very > well-stated, IMO. > > 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 Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Fri Apr 11 16:58:03 2014 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Mwendwa Kivuva) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 23:58:03 +0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <071001cf55a4$ed3191c0$c794b540$@gmail.com> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> <20140411181621.65d5b9df@quill> <071001cf55a4$ed3191c0$c794b540$@gmail.com> Message-ID: If Civil Society does not get a favourable outcome in the meeting, will civil society conclude that "powerful lobbies" planted a mole to steer their agenda as the co-chair and that is why they lost? Can we say with confidence that Chaturvedi will(not) represent the interests of the Civil Society? On 11/04/2014, michael gurstein wrote: > The issue of "personal" vs. "political" still stands. > > The question is who put her on/nominated her for the MAG and for what > purpose... It clearly wasn't CS as she wasn't nominated by any of the > conventional CS processes and to the best of my knowledge no alternative CS > process has come forward to acknowledge them having nominated her... > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow > Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 9:16 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > society co-chair > > Am Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:47:03 -0400 > schrieb McTim : > >> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> > McTim wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > Hence my conclusion is that the lack of any obvious track-record of >> > the kind of work outlined above is pretty damning evidence in >> > itself. >> >> and being on the MAG isn't a 'track record"? >> >> Seriously? > > Last I checked the "M" in "MAG" stood for "Multistakeholder", so why would > being on the MAG qualify someone to represent civil society at the > "stakeholder group co-chair" level of Netmundial??? > > Well if Subi had been proposed/nominated by a reputable civil society body > to serve there as a "civil society representative", that'd be something > that > could be considered as part of the kind of track record that I was talking > about. But to my best knowledge that wasn't the case. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > > -- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya twitter.com/lordmwesh -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From pranesh at cis-india.org Fri Apr 11 17:15:15 2014 From: pranesh at cis-india.org (Pranesh Prakash) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:15:15 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <53466846.3040208@apc.org> References: <53465BD5.303@apc.org> <53466846.3040208@apc.org> Message-ID: <53485B63.7060202@cis-india.org> Very well put, Anriette. Thank you. And along with the processes going forward being "less ad-hoc", I would add, "open to new participants and perspectives", since that seems to be an important theme that's cropping up. But I do wish those new participants to IG dialogues would bring with them expertise in their own fields, and that such expertise enriches their participation in IG discussions. That having been said, I can find scanty evidence online of such expertise in the present case. Searches for her academic writings yield very little, for instance. I do hope this lack of trust can be bridged soon, though. Anriette Esterhuysen [2014-04-10 11:45:42 +0200]: > Resending this. Seems not to have gone through earlier. > > Anriette > > ----------- > > Dear Parminder and all > > I shared the concerns expressed in the original letter from civil > society to the Chair of the NetMundial, and feel that the selection > process of the co-chairs were simply not 'solid' enough. Concerns have > been raised by some of the other co-chairs too. I think it was important > for Indian civil society to send this letter. There are many examples > when selection of non-governmental stakeholders is done in a pretty > roughshod personalised ways. It affects CS most of all, but in this case > selection of the business co-chair has also been questioned. It is an > example of the lack of maturity/clarity etc. in multi-stakeholder > processes which so many of you have discussed. > > But I believe that the point has been made, and that the best way to > move forward is to focus on the event, on civil society's voice at the > event, and on our influence on the outcomes. > > Engaging in taking this forward at this point would, I believe, put > these at risk, and possibly harm the legitimacy of the overall process. > Consider all the hard work that civil society colleagues in Brazil have > put into this event. They are working very, very hard to make it > inclusive, to get people CS to Sao Paulo, and to make sure that the > process gives everyone equal voice. > > I am not saying the process is perfect, but I think effort has been made > to keep it inclusive and transparent. This is clearly an example of > certain decisions being problematicm - this being one of them. But I > think that they have acknowledged it, and we should move on, and use > this event as the strategic opportunity I still believe it can be. > Co-chair selection should not be seen as a primary way of recognising > CS. It is pretty ceremonial. Far more important for us to look at > whether our views are reflected in the draft outcome docs. > > I also believe that continuing with this campaign will damage civil > society in other ways. It is not a constructive struggle. Attacks of a > personal nature against anyone tends to be negative and rarely have > positive outcomes. > > At this point we should be looking at the bigger picture of the > substantive issues that we want to be discussed at NetMundial. For > example, I am concerned that surveillance is getting far less focus than > it deserves to. There is just a short reference to mass surveillance in > the draft outcome doc. > > Going forward the important challenge for us is to find ways of these > processes become less adhoc in the future. > > Anriette > > > On 10/04/2014 07:47, parminder wrote: >> >> I wonder if civil society groups have any response to the below... >> >> this issue was first brought to the notice to global civil society >> groups a few weeks back when almost all civil society organisations >> from India wrote a letter against appointment of Subi as co chair of >> NetMundial... It was most disappointing to face a stony silence from >> the global networks with regard to that representation, which is >> indeed disrespectful of the Indian civil society. >> >> Now, we have a newspaper report >> >> which not only produces evidence of plagiarism against Subi but , much >> more importantly, also shows clearly who is behind her installation as >> NetMundial Co chair - the US big business. And still no response. >> >> May I request the IGC co-cos to take up this issue. And also 1Net >> steering committee members, and civil society members of the executive >> committee and high level committee. >> >> At least please respond to the issue. >> >> If civil society reps wont respond to this issue, I am not sure what >> they would respond to, and in which manner they then 'represent' civil >> society... Here there is practically the entire Indian civil society >> involved in IG writing a representation, about issues that are now >> further exacerbated by the news report >> >> in a top national daily of India. And we find no visible support. >> >> Thanks >> >> parminder >> >> On Tuesday 08 April 2014 11:31 PM, Rishab Bailey wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> >>> Further to the letter from Indian civil society groups to the Chair >>> of NetMundial (regarding the appointment of the civil society >>> co-chair for the meeting), please find attached: >>> >>> (a) the original letter from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >>> Virgilio Almeida, >>> (b) follow up email from members of Indian civil society to Prof. >>> Virgilio Almeida; >>> (b) response of Prof. Almeida to Indian civil society groups. >>> >>> Also do note a recent article published in a leading Indian newspaper >>> giving some of the context behind this: >>> http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/executive-of-telecom-giant-that-aided-nsa-spying-is-on-india-s-cyber-security-panel/article1-1205483.aspx >>> >>> >>> Two of the documents referred to in the above article (concerning >>> plagiarism charges) are also attached to this email. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Rishab Bailey >>> (for the Society for Knowledge Commons, India) >> > -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org ------------------- Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School M: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Fri Apr 11 17:20:45 2014 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:20:45 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> <20140411181621.65d5b9df@quill> <071001cf55a4$ed3191c0$c794b540$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53485CAD.9040808@acm.org> On 11-Apr-14 16:58, Mwendwa Kivuva wrote: > Can we say with confidence that Chaturvedi will(not) represent the > interests of the Civil Society? Hard for one to know what someone else will do. What we can know is that we decided to work with her to help her represent the interests of civil society. Or that we decided not to. 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 stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Fri Apr 11 17:32:33 2014 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:32:33 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: <53485CAD.9040808@acm.org> References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> <20140411181621.65d5b9df@quill> <071001cf55a4$ed3191c0$c794b540$@gmail.com> <53485CAD.9040808@acm.org> Message-ID: All I can add is that those of us who were elected were up all night (well, till only 3am in my case) drafting and discussing documents. At this point, we do have to prioritize on getting the texts as good as we can. Folks on the ground in Brazil have been working round the clock for weeks, if anyone wants to contribute to flowers for them, I am collecting. Kind regards, Stephanie Perrin On 2014-04-11, at 5:20 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > On 11-Apr-14 16:58, Mwendwa Kivuva wrote: >> Can we say with confidence that Chaturvedi will(not) represent the >> interests of the Civil Society? > > Hard for one to know what someone else will do. > > What we can know is that we decided to work with her to help her > represent the interests of civil society. > > Or that we decided not to. > > 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 isolatedn at gmail.com Fri Apr 11 17:58:31 2014 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 03:28:31 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil Society organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil society co-chair In-Reply-To: References: <5346306D.8010107@itforchange.net> <24625ED183D24F89B37AE129F898377D@Toshiba> <53466006.80804@itforchange.net> <20140411143501.10ee7968@quill> <20140411181621.65d5b9df@quill> <071001cf55a4$ed3191c0$c794b540$@gmail.com> Message-ID: The Indian Civil Society letter makes me uncomfortable because it makes such a strong allegation against two individuals. One individual targeted is Virat Bhatia, about whom I heard a good opinion concerning his interest in getting our Government to pay better attention to Internet Governance issues. This opinion came from someone who is quite capable of judging people. Months later I met him during the India Internet Conference, which was an initiative that he led and did very well (In that Conference organized by him, I saw some of the the signatories of this letter or representatives from their organization as invitees, seated equally in panel discussions); The other person targeted, Subi, struck me as a very resourceful organizer who could have been a source of strength for that Conference, this was visible, she brought in student participation, and the Conference, despite some shortcomings, was a well organized event with a good quality of participation. During the India Internet Conference and in the Internet Governance Forum, Subi Chaturvedi was quite noticeable by the strength of the quality of her interventions. Many noticed her for the way she participated even as a new comer to Internet Governance, and a few would have felt that a participant like her should be encouraged. If Virat Bhatia had recommended her to positions, and he happens to be working for a Telecom Company, I would still look at it as a Grey situation: a Telecom Company, an Executive with the usual functions of promoting a company's interests in Business situations, The same Indian Executive with a possibly individual interest in Internet Governance, possibly wanting to improve India's participation in Internet Governance, a successful College Teacher who is noticed in a new environment and encouraged, a not-so-exhaustive effort to find Civil Society candidates for MAG or NETmundial, some possible flaws on the part of one of the individuals, all conveniently brought together and sensationally interpreted with a bias possibly out of misunderstanding and an inclination to rush to a conclusion. Positive judgements could be rushed, not much harm done if the positive judgement goes wrong, but such a strong negative judgement should wait, because of its potential to do irreparable damage to the person. If the signatories wanted a change, with or without a compelling reason, they could have handled it in so many other subtle ways. Sivasubramanian M On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 2:28 AM, Mwendwa Kivuva wrote: > If Civil Society does not get a favourable outcome in the meeting, > will civil society conclude that "powerful lobbies" planted a mole to > steer their agenda as the co-chair and that is why they lost? > > Can we say with confidence that Chaturvedi will(not) represent the > interests of the Civil Society? > > On 11/04/2014, michael gurstein wrote: > > The issue of "personal" vs. "political" still stands. > > > > The question is who put her on/nominated her for the MAG and for what > > purpose... It clearly wasn't CS as she wasn't nominated by any of the > > conventional CS processes and to the best of my knowledge no alternative > CS > > process has come forward to acknowledge them having nominated her... > > > > M > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert > Bollow > > Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 9:16 AM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Letters from Indian Civil > Society > > organisations to the Chair of NetMundial regarding appointment of civil > > society co-chair > > > > Am Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:47:03 -0400 > > schrieb McTim : > > > >> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > >> > McTim wrote: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Hence my conclusion is that the lack of any obvious track-record of > >> > the kind of work outlined above is pretty damning evidence in > >> > itself. > >> > >> and being on the MAG isn't a 'track record"? > >> > >> Seriously? > > > > Last I checked the "M" in "MAG" stood for "Multistakeholder", so why > would > > being on the MAG qualify someone to represent civil society at the > > "stakeholder group co-chair" level of Netmundial??? > > > > Well if Subi had been proposed/nominated by a reputable civil society > body > > to serve there as a "civil society representative", that'd be something > > that > > could be considered as part of the kind of track record that I was > talking > > about. But to my best knowledge that wasn't the case. > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > > > > > > -- > ______________________ > Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya > twitter.com/lordmwesh > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > -- Sivasubramanian Muthusamy India +91 99524 03099 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From mariliamaciel at gmail.com Sat Apr 12 12:15:04 2014 From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel) Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 13:15:04 -0300 Subject: [governance] Meeting EMC and next steps Message-ID: Dear all, Yesterday we had a very long call of the Executive Multistakeholder Committee and we managed to finish the review of Net Mundial initial document (principles and roadmap) from our side. The Secretariat prepared a summary of comments from HLMC members and co-hosts. We also received some track-changed versions of the initial document. Based on all those documents we received, EMC tried to introduce changes that would increase the possibility of consensus. Now there is s version 2.0 of the document. We did manage to preserve points that were important in most CS contributions to Net Mundial, such as Human Rights principles. So I see yesterday's meeting as a good step, although there is much more to come. As explained to us, this document will now go to the board and they can introduce changes. We raised our concerns about the legitimacy of the board, particularly on the side of civil society. We hope that the board will have the sensitivity to refrain from making much changes, given that this document is fruit os large amount of discussions in the multistakeholder committees. After the board's agreement, the doc will be available online for public consultation. Best, Marília -- *Marília Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate www.diplomacy.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 13 01:44:13 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 22:44:13 -0700 Subject: [governance] Google, once disdainful of lobbying, now a master of Washington influence Message-ID: <0f5e01cf56db$671d6540$35582fc0$@gmail.com> Google, once disdainful of lobbying, now a master of Washington influence http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-google-is-transforming-power-and- politicsgoogle-once-disdainful-of-lobbying-now-a-master-of-washington-influe nce/2014/04/12/51648b92-b4d3-11e3-8cb6-284052554d74_story.html?hpid=z1 http://tinyurl.com/plr76oe In May 2012, the law school at George Mason University hosted a forum billed as a "vibrant discussion" about Internet search competition. Many of the major players in the field were there - regulators from the Federal Trade Commission, federal and state prosecutors, top congressional staffers. What the guests had not been told was that the day-long academic conference was in large part the work of Google, which maneuvered behind the scenes with GMU's Law & Economics Center to put on the event. At the time, the company was under FTC investigation over concerns about the dominance of its famed search engine, a case that threatened Google's core business. ....... The behind-the-scenes machinations demonstrate how Google - once a lobbying weakling - has come to master a new method of operating in modern-day Washington, where spending on traditional lobbying is rivaled by other, less visible forms of influence. That system includes financing sympathetic research at universities and think tanks, investing in nonprofit advocacy groups across the political spectrum and funding pro-business coalitions cast as public-interest projects. -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From jefsey at jefsey.com Mon Apr 14 03:44:07 2014 From: jefsey at jefsey.com (Jefsey) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 09:44:07 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [IANAtransition] Redlined Scoping Document In-Reply-To: References: <42c6e618a2d2489cb16c1b38cf1a961e@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu> <1C71E44A-059C-4E44-B202-E1C06DC63D1A@virtualized.org> <534af954.49620e0a.7752.5bd0SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> <534b16fa.c3080e0a.3a68.0b27SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Message-ID: At 01:45 14/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: >Michel stop baiting. I did not say exclusively. I said these >technical ideas are in scope and therefore could be considered. Michel, Vint does not want to plainly respond to your good questions: however he eventually said "could" where you tested for "should". Mike Roberts has had the guts to answer: "So far, the responses on this list and elsewhere are not encouraging". Their and my common reason is simple: the NTIA question is biased and leads to an aporetic dilemma: "do you want the Internet to be American along our plan B or your plan C?" The reality is also very simple: the international catenet, under IETF logic or not, is our's. The question is to which kind of sovereignty does that "our's" resolve? Michael Gurstein is correct: the question of the NTIA is not only about the internet, but about the "internet world", i.e. our world, the world's governance, i.e. the world sovereignty. Let disambiguate the root of the question (keeping in mind that it is iterative, since it concerns a systemic evolution). 1. what is the internet? Why is it so much associated with the DNS? What is the internet we want? as long as we do not agree on these points discussions are futile. 2. from history and architectonical thinking does the Internet need sovereignty? 3. if yes which kind of sovereignty? legal, moral, technical, societal, geographical, cultural, ethical, military, securitary, economical, etc. 4. which kind of apparatus does that sovereignty needs? imperial, aristocratic, diktyocratic, democratic, polycratic, by stake owners, status holders, stakeholders, multitude, people. What is the commonly accepted meaning of each of these terms? 5. what is the best common interest in a closed global system of interests as now is the internet, where only win/win or lose/lose situations are possible. Then and only then, - one can discuss the questions posed by the NTIA: is the world sovereignty to be localized (i.e. to some specific State [USA], to Nation-States [as UN or ITU outside of US control, or GAC embedded in an US registered ICANN?]). - one can know how to follow the ICANN position which is (current Internet Coordination Policy # 3) which does not mention NTIA and calls for experimentation: "ICANN's mandate to preserve stability of the DNS [...] means that ICANN continues to adhere to community-based processes in its decisions regarding the content of the authoritative root. Within its current policy framework, ICANN can give no preference to those who choose to work outside of these processes and outside of the policies engendered by this public trust. None of this precludes experimentation done in a manner that does not threaten the stability of name resolution in the authoritative DNS. Responsible experimentation is essential to the vitality of the Internet. Nor does it preclude the ultimate introduction of new architectures that may ultimately obviate the need for a unique, authoritative root. But the translation of experiments into production and the introduction of new architectures require community-based approaches, and are not compatible with individual efforts to gain proprietary advantage." At this stage, the NTIA aporetic proposition is an "individual effort to gain proprietary advantage" to say the least. jfc >On Apr 13, 2014 7:00 PM, "Michel Gauthier" ><mg at telepresse.com> wrote: >At 23:48 13/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: >>part of the process initiated by ICANN has the scope to look at >>additional technical safeg uards to limit the actions of IANA and >>the TLD operators to those actions both agree to. >Dear Vint, >I just want to be sure I do not misunderstand you, because this is >very important to everyone. >You mean that you consider that the ICANN scope is the ***only*** >set of actions that is to be undertaken, with no additional >experimentation if not within the limits aproved by ICANN. Noother >backup option to be experimented. The internet users are to 100% >rely upon and to 100% trust ICANN. In other words that your entire >internet project is now to ***limit*** itself to the ICANN scope and >its internal safeguards? >This in spite of the ICANN/ICP-3 own recommendations? >What if NTIA disapproves ICANN? >M G > > > > >>v >> >> >>On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Michel Gauthier >><mg at telepresse.com> wrote: >>Dear Vint, >>Thank you to reminding us that no one has ***ever*** changed a >>national or international communication system without being >>"sponsored" by a soverign authority (USG [FCC or NTIA] or >>monopolies): Mokapetris and Postel have not introduced any change >>in the file they received.. >>So, now you state: "it is possible to fashion sufficient >>accountability and transparency mechanisms as well as additional >>interlocks on root zone changes to eliminate the need for an >>institutional replacement for NTIA's oversight". Don't you think it >>is a big responsibility? Without any experimentation for the >>mechanism you only guarantee the possibility. >>What do you think of those who want at least to experiment a back-up? >>M G >>At 21:09 13/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: >>>Seun, >>>there are two separations in the present situation: NTIA as >>>contract holder and ICANN as contractor and the further >>>segregation of IANA as a distinct entity within the ICANN >>>framework. IANA is isolated from the production of policy although >>>i has to follow and execute policies developed in the ICANN >>>process and that are relevant to the IANA responsibilities. One >>>question on the table is whether the IANA functions require the >>>kind of NTIA oversight that has been in place since 1998. I would >>>recall that Jon Postel was largely left to his own resources >>>during his tenure (i.e. the USG did not intervene until he tested >>>the change from one master root zone server to another that >>>triggered a WH reaction). Jon was, of course, a key player within >>>the Internet development community and guided by and trusted by >>>his contemporaries. As many on these lists know, I believe it is >>>possible to fashion sufficient accountability and transparency >>>mechanisms as well as additional interlocks on root zone changes >>>to eliminate the need for an institutional replacement for NTIA's >>>oversight.Ā >>>I appreciate your efforts to try to keep the discussion moving in >>>constructive directions. >>>vint >>>On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Seun Ojedeji >>><seun.ojedeji at gmail.com > wrote: >>>Hello Milton, >>>On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Milton L Mueller >>><mueller at syr.edu> wrote: >>> >>> > As Chip Sharp points out, there is a contractual requirement >>> for IANA staff to not >>> > be involved in policy development (other than to respond to >>> questions), but that >>> > is different than requiring the IANA Functions operator to be >>> separated from ICANN. >>>OK, so you want to play semantic games. Look, everyone involved in >>>this discussion has noted multiple times that ICANN currently has >>>_functional_ separation, via C.2.5 and other requirements. Once >>>that contractual requirement is gone, the issue is how is that >>>separation maintained. Many Ā believe structural separation will >>>be requuired. This was a point made in our original paper back on >>>March 3. Thanks for advancing the debate. >>> >>>What is functional and structural separation within the context of >>>this discussion?. I understand that by contract the IANA function >>>itself requires a separation on its own. The fact that it has a >>>separate department dedicated to it, make it a structural >>>separation within ICANN. I don't think structuring should always >>>have to do with setting up something outside of existing >>>organisation. (as i have always pointed out since the IGP proposal >>>was released) >>>So you have pointed out the right issue; which is to discuss "how >>>to maintain the current separation" (that is already structural >>>and functional) >>>Nevertheless as usual, i am open to be convinced on what aspect i >>>may have missed. ;) >>>Thanks >>>Regards >>>_______________________________________________ >>>ianatransition mailing list >>>ianatransition at icann.org >>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition >>-- >>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>Seun Ojedeji, >>Federal University Oye-Ekiti >>web:Ā Ā ÄâĀ >>http://www.fuoye.edu.ng >>Mobile: +2348035233535 >>alt email: >>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>ianatransition mailing list >>ianatransition at icann.org >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition >>_______________________________________________ >>ianatransition mailing list >>ianatransition at icann.org >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition >_______________________________________________ >ianatransition mailing list >ianatransition at icann.org >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Mon Apr 14 10:13:52 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:13:52 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [IANAtransition] Redlined Scoping Document In-Reply-To: References: <42c6e618a2d2489cb16c1b38cf1a961e@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu> <1C71E44A-059C-4E44-B202-E1C06DC63D1A@virtualized.org> <534af954.49620e0a.7752.5bd0SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> <534b16fa.c3080e0a.3a68.0b27SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Message-ID: There seems to be an elephant in the room again, which everyone is avoiding. Perhaps the elephant is better imagined as a black hole, in the sense that it marks an absence rather than a presence. There is no more trust. We have no trust for one another, let alone trust for “them”. Please refer to the comment from Vint Cerf, from this string, quoted below. At 21:09 13/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: I would recall that Jon Postel was largely left to his own resources during his tenure (i.e. the USG did not intervene until he tested the change from one master root zone server to another that triggered a WH reaction). Jon was, of course, a key player within the Internet development community and guided by and trusted by his contemporaries. The other thing that is missing is truth, in the sense of truth as reliable information. Please refer to the final question under 4 below. On 14 April 2014 03:44, Jefsey wrote: 2. from history and architectonical thinking does the Internet need sovereignty? 3. if yes which kind of sovereignty? legal, moral, technical, societal, geographical, cultural, ethical, military, securitary, economical, etc. 4. which kind of apparatus does that sovereignty needs? imperial, aristocratic, diktyocratic, democratic, polycratic, by stake owners, status holders, stakeholders, multitude, people. What is the commonly accepted meaning of each of these terms? A satisfactory answer to this question might move us towards a re-creation of trust. However we need to remember that in a commercial system predicated on money, the ethos, the basic values, are different. Perhaps we are expecting as automatic the appearance of values that we may espouse – trust, truth, human rights – when the system we were accustomed to has changed underneath us and those values are no longer relevant? If trust cannot be re-established, then there seems to be little chance for rapprochement among the (undefined) stakeholders, however many they may be. Deirdre On 14 April 2014 03:44, Jefsey wrote: > At 01:45 14/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: > > Michel stop baiting. I did not say exclusively. I said these technical > ideas are in scope and therefore could be considered. > > > Michel, > > Vint does not want to plainly respond to your good questions: however he > eventually said "could" where you tested for "should". Mike Roberts has had > the guts to answer: "So far, the responses on this list and elsewhere are > not encouraging". Their and my common reason is simple: the NTIA question > is biased and leads to an aporetic dilemma: "do you want the Internet to be > American along our plan B or your plan C?" > > The reality is also very simple: the international catenet, under IETF > logic or not, is our's. The question is to which kind of sovereignty does > that "our's" resolve? Michael Gurstein is correct: the question of the NTIA > is not only about the internet, but about the "internet world", i.e. our > world, the world's governance, i.e. the world sovereignty. > > Let disambiguate the root of the question (keeping in mind that it is > iterative, since it concerns a systemic evolution). > > 1. what is the internet? Why is it so much associated with the DNS? What > is the internet we want? as long as we do not agree on these points > discussions are futile. > 2. from history and architectonical thinking does the Internet need > sovereignty? > 3. if yes which kind of sovereignty? legal, moral, technical, societal, > geographical, cultural, ethical, military, securitary, economical, etc. > 4. which kind of apparatus does that sovereignty needs? imperial, > aristocratic, diktyocratic, democratic, polycratic, by stake owners, status > holders, stakeholders, multitude, people. What is the commonly accepted > meaning of each of these terms? > 5. what is the best common interest in a closed global system of interests > as now is the internet, where only win/win or lose/lose situations are > possible. > > Then and only then, > - one can discuss the questions posed by the NTIA: is the world > sovereignty to be localized (i.e. to some specific State [USA], to > Nation-States [as UN or ITU outside of US control, or GAC embedded in an US > registered ICANN?]). > - one can know how to follow the ICANN position which is (current Internet > Coordination Policy # 3) which does not mention NTIA and calls for > experimentation: > > "ICANN's mandate to preserve stability of the DNS [...] means that ICANN > continues to adhere to community-based processes in its decisions regarding > the content of the authoritative root. Within its current policy framework, > ICANN can give no preference to those who choose to work outside of these > processes and outside of the policies engendered by this public trust. > None of this precludes experimentation done in a manner that does not > threaten the stability of name resolution in the authoritative DNS. > Responsible experimentation is essential to the vitality of the Internet. > Nor does it preclude the ultimate introduction of new architectures that > may ultimately obviate the need for a unique, authoritative root. But the > translation of experiments into production and the introduction of new > architectures require community-based approaches, and are not compatible > with individual efforts to gain proprietary advantage." > > At this stage, the NTIA aporetic proposition is an "individual effort to > gain proprietary advantage" to say the least. > > jfc > > > On Apr 13, 2014 7:00 PM, "Michel Gauthier" wrote: At > 23:48 13/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: > > part of the process initiated by ICANN has the scope to look at additional > technical safeg uards to limit the actions of IANA and the TLD operators to > those actions both agree to. > > Dear Vint, > I just want to be sure I do not misunderstand you, because this is very > important to everyone. > You mean that you consider that the ICANN scope is the ***only*** set of > actions that is to be undertaken, with no additional experimentation if not > within the limits aproved by ICANN. Noother backup option to be > experimented. The internet users are to 100% rely upon and to 100% trust > ICANN. In other words that your entire internet project is now to > ***limit*** itself to the ICANN scope and its internal safeguards? > This in spite of the ICANN/ICP-3 own recommendations? > What if NTIA disapproves ICANN? > M G > > > > > v > > > On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Michel Gauthier > wrote: Dear Vint, Thank you to reminding us that no one has ***ever*** > changed a national or international communication system without being > "sponsored" by a soverign authority (USG [FCC or NTIA] or monopolies): > Mokapetris and Postel have not introduced any change in the file they > received.. So, now you state: "it is possible to fashion sufficient > accountability and transparency mechanisms as well as additional interlocks > on root zone changes to eliminate the need for an institutional replacement > for NTIA's oversight". Don't you think it is a big responsibility? > Without any experimentation for the mechanism you only guarantee the > possibility. What do you think of those who want at least to experiment a > back-up? M G At 21:09 13/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: > > Seun, there are two separations in the present situation: NTIA as > contract holder and ICANN as contractor and the further segregation of IANA > as a distinct entity within the ICANN framework. IANA is isolated from the > production of policy although i has to follow and execute policies > developed in the ICANN process and that are relevant to the IANA > responsibilities. One question on the table is whether the IANA functions > require the kind of NTIA oversight that has been in place since 1998. I > would recall that Jon Postel was largely left to his own resources during > his tenure (i.e. the USG did not intervene until he tested the change from > one master root zone server to another that triggered a WH reaction). Jon > was, of course, a key player within the Internet development community and > guided by and trusted by his contemporaries. As many on these lists know, I > believe it is possible to fashion sufficient accountability and > transparency mechanisms as well as additional interlocks on root zone > changes to eliminate the need for an institutional replacement for NTIA's > oversight.Ä€ I appreciate your efforts to try to keep the discussion > moving in constructive directions. vint On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 2:59 PM, > Seun Ojedeji wrote: Hello Milton, On Sun, Apr > 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > > As Chip Sharp points out, there is a contractual requirement for IANA > staff to not > be involved in policy development (other than to respond > to questions), but that > is different than requiring the IANA Functions > operator to be separated from ICANN. OK, so you want to play semantic > games. Look, everyone involved in this discussion has noted multiple times > that ICANN currently has _functional_ separation, via C.2.5 and other > requirements. Once that contractual requirement is gone, the issue is how > is that separation maintained. Many Ä€ believe structural separation will > be requuired. This was a point made in our original paper back on March 3. > Thanks for advancing the debate. > > What is functional and structural separation within the context of this > discussion?. I understand that by contract the IANA function itself > requires a separation on its own. The fact that it has a separate > department dedicated to it, make it a structural separation within ICANN. I > don't think structuring should always have to do with setting up something > outside of existing organisation. (as i have always pointed out since the > IGP proposal was released) So you have pointed out the right issue; which > is to discuss "how to maintain the current separation" (that is already > structural and functional) Nevertheless as usual, i am open to be > convinced on what aspect i may have missed. ;) Thanks Regards _______________________________________________ > ianatransition mailing list ianatransition at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition > > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web:Ā Ā > ÄâĀ http://www.fuoye.edu.ng Mobile: +2348035233535 alt > email: seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng > > > > > _______________________________________________ ianatransition mailing > list ianatransition at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition > _______________________________________________ ianatransition mailing > list ianatransition at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition_______________________________________________ > ianatransition mailing list > ianatransition at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 williams.deirdre at gmail.com Mon Apr 14 13:25:02 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 13:25:02 -0400 Subject: [governance] Petition: Affirm a commitment to the "Internet as a Common Good of Mankind to be Governed in the Global Public Interest". Message-ID: This petition has just been published on another list. The members of the IGC should have the opportunity to be aware of it. Deirdre ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: michael gurstein Date: 14 April 2014 12:18 After some discussion with colleagues of the JNC and elsewhere I've launched an initiative/petition intended to impact on the outcome of the NetMundial meeting. I think the best possible achievable outcome of the NetMundial meeting would be an affirmation/reaffirmation of the "Internet as a Global Commons Operating in the Global Public Interest" and the petition is intended to provide an opportunity for voices globally to insist that that at least be placed on the table in Sao Paolo. The petition is available for signing at http://tinyurl.com/nawk9ak The blogpost introducing and giving the longer rationale for the petition can be found at http://tinyurl.com/opqwhs4 It would be really great if you could spread this information through your networks and invite your networks to sign on to the petition or to send notes directly to the NetMundial secretariat secretariat at netmundial.br with a copy to me at gurstein at gmail.com M -- “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 Mon Apr 14 16:06:38 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 13:06:38 -0700 Subject: [governance] FT: The power of the US cable (Internet) barons must be challenged Message-ID: <043d01cf581d$0c027fe0$24077fa0$@gmail.com> >From the Financial Times (UK) The power of the US cable barons must be challenged Edward LuceBy Edward LuceAuthor alerts No one in Washington seems to have the will to stop industry moguls from tightening their grip on the internet Matt Kenyon illustrationCMatt Kenyon Imagine if one company controlled 40 per cent of America's roads and raised tolls far in excess of inflation. Suppose the roads were potholed. Imagine too that its former chief lobbyist headed the highway sector's federal regulator. American drivers would not be happy. US internet users ought to be feeling equally worried. Some time in the next year, Comcast 's proposed $45.2bn takeover of Time Warner Cable is likely to be waved through by antitrust regulators. The chances are it will also get a green light from the Federal Communications Commission (headed by Tom Wheeler, Comcast's former chief lobbyist). The deal will give Comcast TWC control of 40 per cent of US broadband and almost a third of its cable television market. Such concentration ought to trigger concern among the vast majority of Americans who use the internet at home and in their work lives. Yet the backlash is largely confined to a few maverick senators and policy wonks in Washington. When the national highway system was built in the 1950s, it provided the arteries of the US economy. The internet is America's neural system - as well as its eyes and ears. Yet it is monopolised by an ever-shrinking handful of private interests. Where does it go from here? The probability is that Comcast and the rest of the industry will further consolidate its grip on the US internet because there is no one in Washington with the will to stop it. The FCC is dominated by senior former cable industry officials. And there is barely a US elected official - from President Barack Obama down - who has not benefited from Comcast's extensive campaign financing. As with the railway barons of the late 19th century, he who pays the piper picks the tune. The company is brilliantly effective. Last week, David Cohen, Comcast's genial but razor-sharp executive vice-president, batted off a US Senate hearing with the ease of a longstanding Washington insider. A half smile played over his face throughout the three-hour session. One or two senators, notably Al Franken, the Democrat from Minnesota, offered sceptical cross-examination about the proposed merger. But, for the most part, Mr Cohen received softballs. Lindsey Graham, the Republican from South Carolina, complained that his satellite TV service was unreliable when the weather was bad. Like many of his colleagues, Mr Graham either had little idea of what was at stake, or did not care. With interrogations like this, who needs pillow talk? Comcast is aided by the complexity of the US cable industry. Confusion is its ally. The real game is to control the internet. But a lot of the focus has been on the merger's impact on cable TV competition, which is largely a red herring. The TV market is in long-term decline - online video streaming is the viewing of the future. Yet Comcast has won plaudits for saying it would divest 3m television subscribers to head off antitrust concerns. Whether that will be enough to stop it from charging monopoly prices for its TV programmes is of secondary importance. The internet is the prize. The public's indifference to the rise of the internet barons is also assisted by lack of knowledge. Americans are rightly proud of the fact that the US invented the internet. Few know that it was developed largely with public money by the Pentagon - or that Google 's algorithmic search engine began with a grant from the National Science Foundation. It is a classic case of the public sector taking the risk while private operators reap the gains. Few Americans have experienced the fast internet services in places such as Stockholm and Seoul, where prices are a fraction of those in the US. When South Koreans visit the US, they joke about taking an "internet holiday". US average speeds are as little as a tenth as fast as those in Tokyo and Singapore. Among developed economies, only Mexico and Chile are slower. Even Greeks get faster downloads. So can anything stop the cable guy? Possibly. US history is full of optimistic examples. Among the dominant platforms of their time, only railways compare to today's internet. The Vanderbilts and the Stanfords had the regulators in their pockets. Yet their outsize influence generated a backlash that eventually loosened their grip. For the most part, electricity, roads and the telephone were treated as utilities and either publicly owned, or regulated in the public interest. The internet should be no exception. Much like the progressive movement that tamed the railroad barons, opposition to the US internet monopolists is starting to percolate up from the states and the cities. It is mayors, not presidents, who react to potholed roads. Last week, Ed Murray, the mayor of Seattle, declared war on Comcast even though it donated to his election campaign last year. Drawing on the outrage among Seattle's consumers, Mr Murray seems happy to bite the hand that fed him. "If we find that building our own municipal broadband is the best way forward for our citizens then I will lead the way," he said. Others, such as the town of Chattanooga, Tennessee, which is distributing high-speed internet via electricity lines, are also doing it for themselves. Forget Washington. This is where change comes from. "We need to find a path forward as quickly as possible before we [the US] fall even further behind - our economy depends on it," said Mr Murray. As indeed does America's democracy. edward.luce at ft.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Untitled attachment 01028.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2857 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Untitled attachment 01031.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 80899 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 gurstein at gmail.com Mon Apr 14 16:06:54 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 13:06:54 -0700 Subject: [governance] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study References: Message-ID: <044c01cf581d$151d4790$3f57d6b0$@gmail.com> I guess the below explains the overwhelming pressure from the USG to have multistakeholderism implemented for global (Internet) governance since MSism would be the political form through which oligarchies would exert (and mask) their power in global decision making processes. Of course it also suggests why significant elements of CS in Internet Governance processes would also support MSism since they are in many cases the direct beneficiaries of these oligarchies. M From: sid-l at googlegroups.com [mailto:sid-l at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sid Shniad Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 11:20 AM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/14 Common Dreams April 14, 2014 US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” by Eric Zuesse In America, money talks... and democracy dies under its crushing weight. (Photo: Shutterstock)A study, to appear in the Fall 2014 issue of the academic journal Perspectives on Politics, finds that the U.S. is no democracy, but instead an oligarchy, meaning profoundly corrupt, so that the answer to the study’s opening question, "Who governs? Who really rules?" in this country, is: "Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But, ..." and then they go on to say, it's not true, and that, "America's claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened" by the findings in this, the first-ever comprehensive scientific study of the subject, which shows that there is instead "the nearly total failure of 'median voter' and other Majoritarian Electoral Democracy theories [of America]. When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." To put it short: The United States is no democracy, but actually an oligarchy. The authors of this historically important study are Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page, and their article is titled "Testing Theories of American Politics." The authors clarify that the data available are probably under-representing the actual extent of control of the U.S. by the super-rich: Economic Elite Domination theories do rather well in our analysis, even though our findings probably understate the political influence of elites. Our measure of the preferences of wealthy or elite Americans – though useful, and the best we could generate for a large set of policy cases – is probably less consistent with the relevant preferences than are our measures of the views of ordinary citizens or the alignments of engaged interest groups. Yet we found substantial estimated effects even when using this imperfect measure. The real-world impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater. Nonetheless, this is the first-ever scientific study of the question of whether the U.S. is a democracy. "Until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions [that U.S. policymaking operates as a democracy, versus as an oligarchy, versus as some mixture of the two] against each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues." That’s an enormous number of policy-issues studied. What the authors are able to find, despite the deficiencies of the data, is important: the first-ever scientific analysis of whether the U.S. is a democracy, or is instead an oligarchy, or some combination of the two. The clear finding is that the U.S. is an oligarchy, no democratic country, at all. American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media). The U.S., in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious "electoral" "democratic" countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now. Today, after this exhaustive analysis of the data, “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” That's it, in a nutshell. Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sid-l" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sid-l+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. !DSPAM:2676,534c26bd215691645816401! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 14 16:20:21 2014 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 06:20:21 +1000 Subject: TRUST - was Re: [governance] Re: [IANAtransition] Redlined Scoping Document In-Reply-To: References: <42c6e618a2d2489cb16c1b38cf1a961e@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu> <1C71E44A-059C-4E44-B202-E1C06DC63D1A@virtualized.org> <534af954.49620e0a.7752.5bd0SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> <534b16fa.c3080e0a.3a68.0b27SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Well said Deirdre From: Deirdre Williams Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 12:13 AM To: Internet Governance ; Jefsey Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [IANAtransition] Redlined Scoping Document There seems to be an elephant in the room again, which everyone is avoiding. Perhaps the elephant is better imagined as a black hole, in the sense that it marks an absence rather than a presence. There is no more trust. We have no trust for one another, let alone trust for “them”. Please refer to the comment from Vint Cerf, from this string, quoted below. At 21:09 13/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: I would recall that Jon Postel was largely left to his own resources during his tenure (i.e. the USG did not intervene until he tested the change from one master root zone server to another that triggered a WH reaction). Jon was, of course, a key player within the Internet development community and guided by and trusted by his contemporaries. The other thing that is missing is truth, in the sense of truth as reliable information. Please refer to the final question under 4 below. On 14 April 2014 03:44, Jefsey wrote: 2. from history and architectonical thinking does the Internet need sovereignty? 3. if yes which kind of sovereignty? legal, moral, technical, societal, geographical, cultural, ethical, military, securitary, economical, etc. 4. which kind of apparatus does that sovereignty needs? imperial, aristocratic, diktyocratic, democratic, polycratic, by stake owners, status holders, stakeholders, multitude, people. What is the commonly accepted meaning of each of these terms? A satisfactory answer to this question might move us towards a re-creation of trust. However we need to remember that in a commercial system predicated on money, the ethos, the basic values, are different. Perhaps we are expecting as automatic the appearance of values that we may espouse – trust, truth, human rights – when the system we were accustomed to has changed underneath us and those values are no longer relevant? If trust cannot be re-established, then there seems to be little chance for rapprochement among the (undefined) stakeholders, however many they may be. Deirdre On 14 April 2014 03:44, Jefsey wrote: At 01:45 14/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: Michel stop baiting. I did not say exclusively. I said these technical ideas are in scope and therefore could be considered. Michel, Vint does not want to plainly respond to your good questions: however he eventually said "could" where you tested for "should". Mike Roberts has had the guts to answer: "So far, the responses on this list and elsewhere are not encouraging". Their and my common reason is simple: the NTIA question is biased and leads to an aporetic dilemma: "do you want the Internet to be American along our plan B or your plan C?" The reality is also very simple: the international catenet, under IETF logic or not, is our's. The question is to which kind of sovereignty does that "our's" resolve? Michael Gurstein is correct: the question of the NTIA is not only about the internet, but about the "internet world", i.e. our world, the world's governance, i.e. the world sovereignty. Let disambiguate the root of the question (keeping in mind that it is iterative, since it concerns a systemic evolution). 1. what is the internet? Why is it so much associated with the DNS? What is the internet we want? as long as we do not agree on these points discussions are futile. 2. from history and architectonical thinking does the Internet need sovereignty? 3. if yes which kind of sovereignty? legal, moral, technical, societal, geographical, cultural, ethical, military, securitary, economical, etc. 4. which kind of apparatus does that sovereignty needs? imperial, aristocratic, diktyocratic, democratic, polycratic, by stake owners, status holders, stakeholders, multitude, people. What is the commonly accepted meaning of each of these terms? 5. what is the best common interest in a closed global system of interests as now is the internet, where only win/win or lose/lose situations are possible. Then and only then, - one can discuss the questions posed by the NTIA: is the world sovereignty to be localized (i.e. to some specific State [USA], to Nation-States [as UN or ITU outside of US control, or GAC embedded in an US registered ICANN?]). - one can know how to follow the ICANN position which is (current Internet Coordination Policy # 3) which does not mention NTIA and calls for experimentation: "ICANN's mandate to preserve stability of the DNS [...] means that ICANN continues to adhere to community-based processes in its decisions regarding the content of the authoritative root. Within its current policy framework, ICANN can give no preference to those who choose to work outside of these processes and outside of the policies engendered by this public trust. None of this precludes experimentation done in a manner that does not threaten the stability of name resolution in the authoritative DNS. Responsible experimentation is essential to the vitality of the Internet. Nor does it preclude the ultimate introduction of new architectures that may ultimately obviate the need for a unique, authoritative root. But the translation of experiments into production and the introduction of new architectures require community-based approaches, and are not compatible with individual efforts to gain proprietary advantage." At this stage, the NTIA aporetic proposition is an "individual effort to gain proprietary advantage" to say the least. jfc On Apr 13, 2014 7:00 PM, "Michel Gauthier" wrote: At 23:48 13/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: part of the process initiated by ICANN has the scope to look at additional technical safeg uards to limit the actions of IANA and the TLD operators to those actions both agree to. Dear Vint, I just want to be sure I do not misunderstand you, because this is very important to everyone. You mean that you consider that the ICANN scope is the ***only*** set of actions that is to be undertaken, with no additional experimentation if not within the limits aproved by ICANN. Noother backup option to be experimented. The internet users are to 100% rely upon and to 100% trust ICANN. In other words that your entire internet project is now to ***limit*** itself to the ICANN scope and its internal safeguards? This in spite of the ICANN/ICP-3 own recommendations? What if NTIA disapproves ICANN? M G v On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Michel Gauthier wrote: Dear Vint, Thank you to reminding us that no one has ***ever*** changed a national or international communication system without being "sponsored" by a soverign authority (USG [FCC or NTIA] or monopolies): Mokapetris and Postel have not introduced any change in the file they received.. So, now you state: "it is possible to fashion sufficient accountability and transparency mechanisms as well as additional interlocks on root zone changes to eliminate the need for an institutional replacement for NTIA's oversight". Don't you think it is a big responsibility? Without any experimentation for the mechanism you only guarantee the possibility. What do you think of those who want at least to experiment a back-up? M G At 21:09 13/04/2014, Vint Cerf wrote: Seun, there are two separations in the present situation: NTIA as contract holder and ICANN as contractor and the further segregation of IANA as a distinct entity within the ICANN framework. IANA is isolated from the production of policy although i has to follow and execute policies developed in the ICANN process and that are relevant to the IANA responsibilities. One question on the table is whether the IANA functions require the kind of NTIA oversight that has been in place since 1998. I would recall that Jon Postel was largely left to his own resources during his tenure (i.e. the USG did not intervene until he tested the change from one master root zone server to another that triggered a WH reaction). Jon was, of course, a key player within the Internet development community and guided by and trusted by his contemporaries. As many on these lists know, I believe it is possible to fashion sufficient accountability and transparency mechanisms as well as additional interlocks on root zone changes to eliminate the need for an institutional replacement for NTIA's oversight.Ä€ I appreciate your efforts to try to keep the discussion moving in constructive directions. vint On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: Hello Milton, On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > As Chip Sharp points out, there is a contractual requirement for IANA staff to not > be involved in policy development (other than to respond to questions), but that > is different than requiring the IANA Functions operator to be separated from ICANN. OK, so you want to play semantic games. Look, everyone involved in this discussion has noted multiple times that ICANN currently has _functional_ separation, via C.2.5 and other requirements. Once that contractual requirement is gone, the issue is how is that separation maintained. Many Ä€ believe structural separation will be requuired. This was a point made in our original paper back on March 3. Thanks for advancing the debate. What is functional and structural separation within the context of this discussion?. I understand that by contract the IANA function itself requires a separation on its own. The fact that it has a separate department dedicated to it, make it a structural separation within ICANN. I don't think structuring should always have to do with setting up something outside of existing organisation. (as i have always pointed out since the IGP proposal was released) So you have pointed out the right issue; which is to discuss "how to maintain the current separation" (that is already structural and functional) Nevertheless as usual, i am open to be convinced on what aspect i may have missed. ;) Thanks Regards _______________________________________________ ianatransition mailing list ianatransition at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web:Ā Ā ÄâĀ http://www.fuoye.edu.ng Mobile: +2348035233535 alt email:seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng _______________________________________________ ianatransition mailing list ianatransition at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition _______________________________________________ ianatransition mailing list ianatransition at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition _______________________________________________ ianatransition mailing list ianatransition at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To 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 george.sadowsky at gmail.com Mon Apr 14 18:57:58 2014 From: george.sadowsky at gmail.com (George Sadowsky) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:57:58 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [discuss] FT: The power of the US cable (Internet) barons must be challenged In-Reply-To: <043d01cf581d$0c027fe0$24077fa0$@gmail.com> References: <043d01cf581d$0c027fe0$24077fa0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Mike, Is your point that Internet governance concerns should be expanded to include layer 1 connectivity providers, and all that the subject implies? If so, perhaps you could say more rather than just copying an article from the press. If not, then this is off topic. George On Apr 14, 2014, at 4:06 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > From the Financial Times (UK) > The power of the US cable barons must be challenged > > By Edward LuceAuthor alerts > > No one in Washington seems to have the will to stop industry moguls from tightening their grip on the internet > ©Matt Kenyon > Imagine if one company controlled 40 per cent of America’s roads and raised tolls far in excess of inflation. Suppose the roads were potholed. Imagine too that its former chief lobbyist headed the highway sector’s federal regulator. American drivers would not be happy. US internet users ought to be feeling equally worried. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From joana at varonferraz.com Mon Apr 14 19:58:59 2014 From: joana at varonferraz.com (Joana Varon) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 20:58:59 -0300 Subject: [governance] NetMundial Draft Outcome document Online for comments at the platform Message-ID: FYI: http://document.netmundial.br/introduction/ Please, engage with your comments or rating the paragraphs you support. Sorry for cross-posting. It would be good if we channel short and concise comments in that platform. Enjoy! Kind regards, Joana -- -- Joana Varon Ferraz @joana_varon PGP 0x016B8E73 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 14 21:01:36 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 06:31:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] Petition: Affirm a commitment to the "Internet as a Common Good of Mankind to be Governed in the Global Public Interest". In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The language has to be specific especially if using terms repurposed from economics. Global commons isn't always common good, just for instance. --srs (iPad) > On 14-Apr-2014, at 22:55, Deirdre Williams wrote: > > This petition has just been published on another list. The members of the IGC should have the opportunity to be aware of it. > Deirdre > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: michael gurstein > Date: 14 April 2014 12:18 > > After some discussion with colleagues of the JNC and elsewhere I've launched an initiative/petition intended to impact on the outcome of the NetMundial meeting. I think the best possible achievable outcome of the NetMundial meeting would be an affirmation/reaffirmation of the "Internet as a Global Commons Operating in the Global Public Interest" and the petition is intended to provide an opportunity for voices globally to insist that that at least be placed on the table in Sao Paolo. > > The petition is available for signing at http://tinyurl.com/nawk9ak > > The blogpost introducing and giving the longer rationale for the petition can be found at http://tinyurl.com/opqwhs4 > > It would be really great if you could spread this information through your networks and invite your networks to sign on to the petition or to send notes directly to the NetMundial secretariat secretariat at netmundial.br with a copy to me at gurstein at gmail.com > > M > > -- > “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 suresh at hserus.net Mon Apr 14 21:03:51 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 06:33:51 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study In-Reply-To: <044c01cf581d$151d4790$3f57d6b0$@gmail.com> References: <044c01cf581d$151d4790$3f57d6b0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Funny, I support MSism and I have yet to see a penny of this "direct benefit from oligarchies" Can we please dispense with the conspiracy theories at least, even if you don't like multistakeholderism in the form that it is commonly practiced? --srs (iPad) > On 15-Apr-2014, at 1:36, "michael gurstein" wrote: > > I guess the below explains the overwhelming pressure from the USG to have multistakeholderism implemented for global (Internet) governance since MSism would be the political form through which oligarchies would exert (and mask) their power in global decision making processes. > > Of course it also suggests why significant elements of CS in Internet Governance processes would also support MSism since they are in many cases the direct beneficiaries of these oligarchies. > > M > > From: sid-l at googlegroups.com [mailto:sid-l at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sid Shniad > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 11:20 AM > To: undisclosed-recipients: > Subject: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study > > http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/14 > > Common Dreams April 14, 2014 > US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study > > “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” > > by Eric Zuesse > In America, money talks... and democracy dies under its crushing weight. (Photo: Shutterstock)A study, to appear in the Fall 2014 issue of the academic journal Perspectives on Politics, finds that the U.S. is no democracy, but instead an oligarchy, meaning profoundly corrupt, so that the answer to the study’s opening question, "Who governs? Who really rules?" in this country, is: > > "Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But, ..." and then they go on to say, it's not true, and that, "America's claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened" by the findings in this, the first-ever comprehensive scientific study of the subject, which shows that there is instead "the nearly total failure of 'median voter' and other Majoritarian Electoral Democracy theories [of America]. When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." > > To put it short: The United States is no democracy, but actually an oligarchy. > > The authors of this historically important study are Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page, and their article is titled "Testing Theories of American Politics." The authors clarify that the data available are probably under-representing the actual extent of control of the U.S. by the super-rich: > > Economic Elite Domination theories do rather well in our analysis, even though our findings probably understate the political influence of elites. Our measure of the preferences of wealthy or elite Americans – though useful, and the best we could generate for a large set of policy cases – is probably less consistent with the relevant preferences than are our measures of the views of ordinary citizens or the alignments of engaged interest groups. Yet we found substantial estimated effects even when using this imperfect measure. The real-world impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater. > > Nonetheless, this is the first-ever scientific study of the question of whether the U.S. is a democracy. "Until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions [that U.S. policymaking operates as a democracy, versus as an oligarchy, versus as some mixture of the two] against each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues." That’s an enormous number of policy-issues studied. > > What the authors are able to find, despite the deficiencies of the data, is important: the first-ever scientific analysis of whether the U.S. is a democracy, or is instead an oligarchy, or some combination of the two. The clear finding is that the U.S. is an oligarchy, no democratic country, at all. American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media). The U.S., in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious "electoral" "democratic" countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now. Today, after this exhaustive analysis of the data, “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” That's it, in a nutshell. > > Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity. > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sid-l" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sid-l+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > !DSPAM:2676,534c26bd215691645816401! > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Mon Apr 14 21:08:13 2014 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:08:13 -0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [Marcocivil] RES: NetMundial Draft Outcome document Online for comments at the platform In-Reply-To: <7C9F27BE10361942966E4835F365891A77DAFC7C@A19MAIL.aricle19.org> References: <7C9F27BE10361942966E4835F365891A77DAFC7C@A19MAIL.aricle19.org> Message-ID: <534C867D.9030203@cafonso.ca> Laura, I think you did not read the docs in detail: "Internet should continue to be a globally coherent, interconnected, stable, unfragmented, scalable and accessible network-of-networks, based on a common set of unique identifiers and that allows the free flow of data packets/information." and: "The Internet should be preserved as a fertile and innovative environment based on an open system architecture, with voluntary collaboration, collective stewardship and participation, recognizing technical management principles for efficient and improved network operation and preserving the end-to-end nature of the network, equal technical treatment of all protocols and data, delivered by the underlying communications and seeking to resolve technical issues at a level closest to their origin." --c.a. On 04/14/2014 09:59 PM, Laura Tresca wrote: > Wow, net neutrality is NOT pointed out as a principle! > > ARTICLE 19 > Oficina para Sudamerica/ South America Office > Rua João Adolfo, 118 - 8ºandar > Anhangabaú, São Paulo, Brasil > tel. +55 11 30570042/0071 > www.artigo19.org/ www.article19.org > ________________________________ > De: marcocivil-bounces at listas.ensol.org.br [marcocivil-bounces at listas.ensol.org.br] em nome de Joana Varon [joana at varonferraz.com] > Enviado: segunda-feira, 14 de abril de 2014 20:58 > Para: <, bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>, ; 1Net List; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org; marcocivil at listas.ensol.org.br; webwewant at googlegroups.com > Assunto: [Marcocivil] NetMundial Draft Outcome document Online for comments at the platform > > FYI: http://document.netmundial.br/introduction/ > > Please, engage with your comments or rating the paragraphs you support. > > Sorry for cross-posting. It would be good if we channel short and concise comments in that platform. > > Enjoy! > > Kind regards, > > Joana > -- > -- > > Joana Varon Ferraz > @joana_varon > PGP 0x016B8E73 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Lista de email Marcocivil > Marcocivil at listas.ensol.org.br > http://listas.ensol.org.br/listinfo.cgi/marcocivil-ensol.org.br > Descadastrar: envie email a Marcocivil-unsubscribe at listas.ensol.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 suresh at hserus.net Mon Apr 14 21:08:57 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 06:38:57 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [discuss] FT: The power of the US cable (Internet) barons must be challenged In-Reply-To: References: <043d01cf581d$0c027fe0$24077fa0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6E400BE4-C849-4CB2-8019-3A1C815BD994@hserus.net> (Applause) This hobby horse has been ridden long enough, can we please bring the discussion back to internet governance? Please? --srs (iPad) > On 15-Apr-2014, at 4:27, George Sadowsky wrote: > > Mike, > > Is your point that Internet governance concerns should be expanded to include layer 1 connectivity providers, and all that the subject implies? > > If so, perhaps you could say more rather than just copying an article from the press. If not, then this is off topic. > > George > > >> On Apr 14, 2014, at 4:06 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >> From the Financial Times (UK) >> The power of the US cable barons must be challenged >> >> By Edward LuceAuthor alerts >> >> No one in Washington seems to have the will to stop industry moguls from tightening their grip on the internet >> ©Matt Kenyon >> Imagine if one company controlled 40 per cent of America’s roads and raised tolls far in excess of inflation. Suppose the roads were potholed. Imagine too that its former chief lobbyist headed the highway sector’s federal regulator. American drivers would not be happy. US internet users ought to be feeling equally worried. >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Mon Apr 14 22:36:51 2014 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 11:36:51 +0900 Subject: [governance] NETmundial documents online for comment Message-ID: <749AA860-B2CF-4C8A-B783-073C6C4F9E9D@glocom.ac.jp> Please see Use the Navigate button. Comments will close April 21th, 12:00 UTC. Adam WELCOME TO NETMUNDIAL PUBLIC COMMENTS PAGE After an open call for content contribution, NETmundial – the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance – received 188 documents from 46 different countries. These documents were sent by representatives of Civil Society, Private Sector, Academy, Governments and Technical Community. Based on these broad set of inputs, NETmundial’s Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) prepared a Draft Outcome Document and submitted it for consultation with NETmundial’s High-level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC) on April 3rd, 2014. After incorporating the inputs from the HLMC, under the guidance of NETmundial’s Chair and Co-Chairs, a final version of the document is released here for public comments. The public consultation will be open for comments on NETmundial’s Executive Committee Output Document from April 14th until April 21th, 12:00 UTC. For this public consultation a commenting tool is available online at http://document.netmundial.br/ with the purpose of receiving public comments on specific points of the document. It is not necessary to create an account in order to post your comment to the document. You’ll be able to immediately start reading the document and whenever you have something to say, you’ll just have to provide a full name and contact email address alongside your comment. By clicking on any paragraph of the document, you’ll be able to see all the comments other people have already made pertaining to that portion of the text; as referred above, you are also granted the possibility to register your own observations. Maybe your concern was already addressed in someone else’s comment, so please be sure to take a look at the previous comments before making yours. This public consultation closes the loop that started by collecting public content contributions. Such contributions were compiled and merged into the Outcome Document by the NETmundial EMC and HLMC committees in the spirit of trying to represent the overall context of the current Internet Governance debate. It is very important to receive further public input in this final stage, so that the outcome is true to the issues and concerns presented by all stakeholders. END -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From nnenna75 at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 02:35:46 2014 From: nnenna75 at gmail.com (Nnenna Nwakanma) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 06:35:46 +0000 Subject: [governance] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Message-ID: Dear all, I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues will be overlooked. I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a draft/keypoints will be Monday. Hope we can pull this off well. All for now Nnenna -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 02:38:41 2014 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 16:38:41 +1000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! From: Nnenna Nwakanma Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM To: Governance ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net Subject: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Dear all, I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues will be overlooked. I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a draft/keypoints will be Monday. Hope we can pull this off well. All for now Nnenna -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From joana at varonferraz.com Tue Apr 15 02:42:49 2014 From: joana at varonferraz.com (Joana Varon) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 03:42:49 -0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> Message-ID: ;) happy to help. On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > Congratulations Nnenna - great choice! > > > > *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM > *To:* Governance ; > mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society > major issues > > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one > of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > Nnenna > > ------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- -- Joana Varon Ferraz @joana_varon PGP 0x016B8E73 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From remmyn at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 03:12:19 2014 From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 00:12:19 -0700 Subject: [governance] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Message-ID: <-4755729043675593517@unknownmsgid> Good news if you ask me. Thank God for journey mercies. Remmy Sent from my Windows Phone ------------------------------ From: Nnenna Nwakanma Sent: 15/04/2014 07:36 To: Governance ; Subject: [governance] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Dear all, I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues will be overlooked. I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a draft/keypoints will be Monday. Hope we can pull this off well. All for now Nnenna -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From jeanette at wzb.eu Tue Apr 15 03:23:07 2014 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:23:07 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> Message-ID: <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> + 1 jeanette Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: > Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! > *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM > *To:* Governance ; > mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society > major issues > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack > one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > Nnenna > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Tue Apr 15 03:44:04 2014 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:44:04 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> Congrats Nnenna! Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of principles that defines what the public interest is in internet governance that can be used to promote and protect this public interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. Anriette On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > + 1 > jeanette > > Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >> *To:* Governance ; >> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >> major issues >> Dear all, >> >> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me >> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >> >> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >> >> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into >> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues >> will be overlooked. >> >> >> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >> >> Hope we can pull this off well. >> >> All for now >> >> Nnenna >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- ------------------------------------------------------ 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From ggithaiga at hotmail.com Tue Apr 15 03:56:09 2014 From: ggithaiga at hotmail.com (Grace Githaiga) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 07:56:09 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu>,<534CE344.2050200@apc.org> Message-ID: Great points Anriette. Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:44:04 +0200 From: anriette at apc.org To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Congrats Nnenna! Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of principles that defines what the public interest is in internet governance that can be used to promote and protect this public interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. Anriette On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: + 1 jeanette Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM *To:* Governance ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Dear all, I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues will be overlooked. I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a draft/keypoints will be Monday. Hope we can pull this off well. All for now Nnenna ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- ------------------------------------------------------ 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From lorena at collaboratory.de Tue Apr 15 03:57:09 2014 From: lorena at collaboratory.de (Lorena Jaume-Palasi) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:57:09 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> Message-ID: +1 2014-04-15 9:44 GMT+02:00 Anriette Esterhuysen : > Congrats Nnenna! > > Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working > inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly > those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very > different from putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard > work, change in behaviour, change in structures and procedures, > consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always > agree. It also requires a common framework of principles that defines what > the public interest is in internet governance that can be used to promote > and protect this public interest across the internet governance ecosystem > and it is this framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. > > You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - > mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to > deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder > internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross > that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be > discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with > solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. > > Anriette > > On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > > + 1 > jeanette > > Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: > > Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! > *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM > *To:* Governance ; > mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society > major issues > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack > one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > Nnenna > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org > executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org > po box 29755, melville 2109 > south africa > tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- Lorena Jaume-Palasí, M.A. ∙ Coordinator of the Global Internet Governance (GIG) Ohu Internet & Gesellschaft Co:llaboratory e.V. www.collaboratory.de ∙ Newsletter ∙ Facebook ∙ Twitter Youtube -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Tue Apr 15 04:10:45 2014 From: admin at alkasir.com (Walid AL-SAQAF) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:10:45 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Congrats Nenna and I'm really delighted to know that we have you as a champion for civil society and the global south as well. I support Anriette's points and wish to add that it would be an opportune moment for you to raise the issue of bridging the digital divide as a priority and doing it a comprehensive way does require involving all stakeholders. Remind governments that, on issues related to the internet, all stakeholders should have a say and it is NOT business as usual. I hope your message will resonate, in particular, with Arab governments, which are -in my view- still living in the past and may want to hijack the process to put government in charge and shape the future of IG. Let's not allow that to happen. Good luck! Sincerely, Walid On Apr 15, 2014 8:36 AM, "Nnenna Nwakanma" wrote: > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one > of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > Nnenna > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From jefsey at jefsey.com Tue Apr 15 05:13:50 2014 From: jefsey at jefsey.com (Jefsey) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 11:13:50 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [Marcocivil] RES: NetMundial Draft Outcome document Online for comments at the platform In-Reply-To: <534C867D.9030203@cafonso.ca> References: <7C9F27BE10361942966E4835F365891A77DAFC7C@A19MAIL.aricle19.org> <534C867D.9030203@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: At 03:08 15/04/2014, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > unfragmented, Dear Carlos, the internet is fragmented at missing layer six. This results in the RFC 6852 "global communities" of which the economy is now to direct the standardization evolution. This fragmentation is dependent on the mobile OS environment. It is not yet at the parameter plane but this what all this is about. The whole lobbying we are submitted to comes from this: the edge providers (Google, Apple, Microsoft ...) want to get rid of the single NTIA oversight. The internet is now growing as the addition of the global community networks (edge MS) of the network of networks opposing through a fragmented "de facto standardisation" the emergence of general personal (multitude's MS) virtual networking of the networks of networks. Please read RFC 6852. The qui-pro-quo is to societally engineer this new status-quo as being supposedly desired by the Civil Society (i.e. consumers). Brazil is a key spot for this tug of war as Europe is sleeping and US is already conquered. It has the Marco Civil and the engineering capacity to oppose fragmentation through open source. The brillant move is to diverted attention from the technical dividing to a political bog, so everyone's focus will be on the wrong spot until a de facto consensus of usage has settled the technical fragmentation, which in turn will induce the community fragmentation, and eventually the parameter fragmentation that will stabilize the market share new status-quo through the growth of goodwill "bridges". This is why the only way to oppose that now leading trend is to rebuild the internet from its WSIS indentified core: the person, its digital use, its digital resources optimization, from home to the global world, on an open Libre basis to get rid of the commercial money of the edge oligopoles. As a Brazilian Civil Society leader your role is not negligible in that uncertain situation. jfc -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From jeanchristophe.nothias at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 05:23:18 2014 From: jeanchristophe.nothias at gmail.com (Jean-Christophe Nothias) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 11:23:18 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [Marcocivil] RES: NetMundial Draft Outcome document Online for comments at the platform In-Reply-To: References: <7C9F27BE10361942966E4835F365891A77DAFC7C@A19MAIL.aricle19.org> <534C867D.9030203@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <73727EF5-87F6-4ED9-9489-AD6CE96C530F@gmail.com> +1 Le 15 avr. 2014 à 11:13, Jefsey a écrit : > At 03:08 15/04/2014, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >> unfragmented, > > Dear Carlos, > > the internet is fragmented at missing layer six. This results in the RFC 6852 "global communities" of which the economy is now to direct the standardization evolution. This fragmentation is dependent on the mobile OS environment. It is not yet at the parameter plane but this what all this is about. > > The whole lobbying we are submitted to comes from this: the edge providers (Google, Apple, Microsoft ...) want to get rid of the single NTIA oversight. The internet is now growing as the addition of the global community networks (edge MS) of the network of networks opposing through a fragmented "de facto standardisation" the emergence of general personal (multitude's MS) virtual networking of the networks of networks. Please read RFC 6852. > > The qui-pro-quo is to societally engineer this new status-quo as being supposedly desired by the Civil Society (i.e. consumers). Brazil is a key spot for this tug of war as Europe is sleeping and US is already conquered. It has the Marco Civil and the engineering capacity to oppose fragmentation through open source. The brillant move is to diverted attention from the technical dividing to a political bog, so everyone's focus will be on the wrong spot until a de facto consensus of usage has settled the technical fragmentation, which in turn will induce the community fragmentation, and eventually the parameter fragmentation that will stabilize the market share new status-quo through the growth of goodwill "bridges". > > This is why the only way to oppose that now leading trend is to rebuild the internet from its WSIS indentified core: the person, its digital use, its digital resources optimization, from home to the global world, on an open Libre basis to get rid of the commercial money of the edge oligopoles. > > As a Brazilian Civil Society leader your role is not negligible in that uncertain situation. > > jfc > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Tue Apr 15 06:48:43 2014 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 22:48:43 +1200 Subject: [governance] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hey Nnenna, Many thanks for the heads up. Safe travels. Best Wishes, Sala On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Nnenna Nwakanma wrote: > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one > of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > 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 gurstein at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 06:50:04 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 03:50:04 -0700 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study In-Reply-To: <1DEB7534D981B444BF234789326B22A8AF08BDFC51@MBX.INTERNEWS.LOCAL> References: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study <1DEB7534D981B444BF234789326B22A8AF08BDFC51@MBX.INTERNEWS.LOCAL> Message-ID: <079f01cf5898$762b5ba0$628212e0$@gmail.com> Mike, Do I take you as saying below that you would trade (even the opportunity) of influence via democratic participation for the many; in return for the (in my opinion) illusion of not being “excluded” for the few via multistakeholderism? M From: Mike Godwin (mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG) [mailto:mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG] Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 2:48 PM To: michael gurstein; 1Net List; Internet Governance Caucus List; bestbits Subject: RE: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study Convergence is not causality. Lots of interested stakeholders may legitimately prefer multistakeholder models from ones on which they are baseline excluded. Sent from my iPhone using Mail+ for Outlook From: michael gurstein Sent: 4/14/14, 4:07 PM To: 1Net List, Internet Governance Caucus List, bestbits Subject: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study I guess the below explains the overwhelming pressure from the USG to have multistakeholderism implemented for global (Internet) governance since MSism would be the political form through which oligarchies would exert (and mask) their power in global decision making processes. Of course it also suggests why significant elements of CS in Internet Governance processes would also support MSism since they are in many cases the direct beneficiaries of these oligarchies. M From: sid-l at googlegroups.com [mailto:sid-l at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sid Shniad Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 11:20 AM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/14 Common Dreams April 14, 2014 US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” by Eric Zuesse In America, money talks... and democracy dies under its crushing weight. (Photo: Shutterstock)A study, to appear in the Fall 2014 issue of the academic journal Perspectives on Politics, finds that the U.S. is no democracy, but instead an oligarchy, meaning profoundly corrupt, so that the answer to the study’s opening question, "Who governs? Who really rules?" in this country, is: "Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But, ..." and then they go on to say, it's not true, and that, "America's claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened" by the findings in this, the first-ever comprehensive scientific study of the subject, which shows that there is instead "the nearly total failure of 'median voter' and other Majoritarian Electoral Democracy theories [of America]. When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." To put it short: The United States is no democracy, but actually an oligarchy. The authors of this historically important study are Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page, and their article is titled "Testing Theories of American Politics." The authors clarify that the data available are probably under-representing the actual extent of control of the U.S. by the super-rich: Economic Elite Domination theories do rather well in our analysis, even though our findings probably understate the political influence of elites. Our measure of the preferences of wealthy or elite Americans – though useful, and the best we could generate for a large set of policy cases – is probably less consistent with the relevant preferences than are our measures of the views of ordinary citizens or the alignments of engaged interest groups. Yet we found substantial estimated effects even when using this imperfect measure. The real-world impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater. Nonetheless, this is the first-ever scientific study of the question of whether the U.S. is a democracy. "Until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions [that U.S. policymaking operates as a democracy, versus as an oligarchy, versus as some mixture of the two] against each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues." That’s an enormous number of policy-issues studied. What the authors are able to find, despite the deficiencies of the data, is important: the first-ever scientific analysis of whether the U.S. is a democracy, or is instead an oligarchy, or some combination of the two. The clear finding is that the U.S. is an oligarchy, no democratic country, at all. American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media). The U.S., in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious "electoral" "democratic" countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now. Today, after this exhaustive analysis of the data, “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” That's it, in a nutshell. Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sid-l" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sid-l+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. !DSPAM:2676,534c26bd215691645816401! Click here to report this email as spam. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 07:18:50 2014 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 07:18:50 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20140415111850.5779601.10632.39472@gmail.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 07:47:30 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 07:47:30 -0400 Subject: [governance] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Nnenna, I am quite sure that it will be "pulled off well" :-) Anriette mentions trust twice in her suggestion. I hope you can include trust as a desirable state to achieve. You'll look great and sound great De On 15 April 2014 02:35, Nnenna Nwakanma wrote: > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one > of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > 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 > > -- “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 iza at anr.org Tue Apr 15 07:49:32 2014 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 20:49:32 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Congratulations Nnenna!! One point I like to share is - We need to increase meaningful input and participation from the people in the developing parts of the world. This does not necessarily developing countries and their governments. There are so many people living in the underdeveloped parts inside developed countries. They are mostly in the remote areas, in the mountains, country side, far from major cities etc. Or even inside large cities but in the slums, poor areas. They are as marginalized and ignored. People in the small and often remote island countries, landlocked countries are in similar situation, if not the same. These were mentioned by Tunis Agenda, I believe. Often, if the got connectivity, thanks to Internet and mobile phones, these new links might bring as much benefits as problems. But their voices and views are often ignored, not much invited. Most domain names are owned and operated by the people in the cities. Of course, these economic factors and conditions are not directly generated by the Internet, and Internet Governance issues may not seem to be directly linked. But nonetheless, I like to ask you to consider these issues. Thank you, izumi 2014年4月15日火曜日、Nnenna Nwakanmaさんは書きました: > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one > of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > Nnenna > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Tue Apr 15 07:52:55 2014 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 11:52:55 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <20140415111850.5779601.10632.39472@gmail.com> References: <20140415111850.5779601.10632.39472@gmail.com> Message-ID: Congrats, Nnenna! + to Anriette's points (to keep it at the principles and big ideas level, given the time constraint.) So I'm not going to add to the load, as I'm sure at the end all good ideas will be raised --not to mention you know as well as I do the corner of the world you and I live in. Good luck! mawaki On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Tracy Hackshaw @ Google < tracyhackshaw at gmail.com> wrote: > Congratulations Nnenna! > > It would be very much appreciated if you could make a mention of the > challenges being faced by Small Island Developing States in their ongoing > struggle to balance Information Society objectives with basic > infrastructural requirements in the face of environmental threats. > > Best wishes, > > Tracy > > Sent from BlackBerry Q10 > *From: *Nnenna Nwakanma > *Sent: *Tuesday, April 15, 2014 2:36 AM > *To: *Governance; > *Reply To: *Nnenna Nwakanma > *Subject: *[bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society > major issues > > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one > of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > Nnenna > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 08:04:53 2014 From: bavouc at gmail.com (Martial Bavou) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:04:53 +0100 Subject: [governance] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 Nnenna From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nnenna Nwakanma Sent: mardi 15 avril 2014 07:36 To: Governance; Subject: [governance] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Dear all, I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues will be overlooked. I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a draft/keypoints will be Monday. Hope we can pull this off well. All for now Nnenna -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 08:15:38 2014 From: valeriab at apc.org (Valeria Betancourt) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 07:15:38 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> Message-ID: <3EE55ECD-39A2-4363-8611-9FDB4F7B44EA@apc.org> Congratulations, Nnenna! El 15/04/2014, a las 1:42, Joana Varon escribió: > ;) > happy to help. > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! > > > > From: Nnenna Nwakanma > Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM > To: Governance ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > Subject: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues > > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > Nnenna > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > -- > > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 08:16:24 2014 From: valeriab at apc.org (Valeria Betancourt) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 07:16:24 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> Message-ID: <3E5FA9C5-7BC8-442F-8A5C-53B62A00E838@apc.org> + 1 on Anriette’s points. El 15/04/2014, a las 2:44, Anriette Esterhuysen escribió: > Congrats Nnenna! > > Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of principles that defines what the public interest is in internet governance that can be used to promote and protect this public interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. > > You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. > > Anriette > > On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >> + 1 >> jeanette >> >> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>> *To:* Governance ; >>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>> major issues >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me >>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>> >>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>> >>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into >>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues >>> will be overlooked. >>> >>> >>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>> >>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>> >>> All for now >>> >>> Nnenna >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Tue Apr 15 08:02:28 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 05:02:28 -0700 Subject: [governance] RE: [be US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study Message-ID: <003301cf58a2$93d1cc20$bb756460$@gmail.com> A couple of points before I rush off. It is to my mind quite bizarre to equate democracy with governmentalism. Democracy is giving the people voice (including dare I say through independent media) and the means to turn those voices into actions. Government is a means, perhaps the best means to do this but in no sense is it the only means and certainly doesn't involve a commitment to incumbent governments (or inter-governments) or their actions. Second, the issue with MSism is not its relation (or not) to democratic "principles" however high minded or rhetorically compelling. The question is its relation to democratic practices i.e. substituting decision making by the few and self-selected for decision making by the many operating through accountable and transparent processes. M From: Mike Godwin (mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG) [mailto:mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:19 AM To: michael gurstein; 'Internet Governance Caucus List'; 'bestbits' Subject: Re: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study My own personal view, which I have to stress does not purport to represent my employer, is more nuanced. I think all governments, from the most democratic to the most authoritarian, share certain self-perceptions and assumptions that tend to run against the radically democratic potentialities of online media. (In my own work, I run into this constantly - the perception that the internet is so inherently disruptive that it must be controlled in one way or another. It's how, until very recently, democratic governments even thought of the traditional press.) This isn't malice or selfishness - instead, this is an "occupational hazard" if your occupation is being a government, and nobody is immune, really. Multi-stakeholderism at its best, in my view, formalizes the necessity of taking input from non-governmental "outsiders." I think that's the right outcome, democratically speaking. (I also happen to think that the USG's favoring multi-stakeholderism--at least as it does right now--is a happy circumstance, because institutional governmental self-interest over the long term tends to favor governmental--or inter-governmental--bodies most of the time.) So my "solution space" for internet governance tends to center on multi-stakeholderism, clearly, but of course multi-stakeholderism has to be structured correctly, and multi-stakeholderism is to be valued not in itself but to the extent that it serves democratic values. (A multistakeholder system favoring corporate dominance is no better than one favoring institutional government dominance, and of course, as I think you agree, might be worse.) By contrast, I don't view the ITU (for example) as being a leading candidate for serving those values. We have a number of models to pick from. And as Laura DeNardis suggests in her recent writings, we may actually need to pick different models for different particular governance spaces and roles. -Mike -- Mike Godwin | Senior Legal Advisor, Global Internet Policy Project mgodwin at internews.org | Mobile 415-793-4446 Skype mnemonic1026 Address 1601 R Street NW, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20009 USA INTERNEWS | Local Voices. Global Change. www.internews.org | @internews | facebook.com/internews From: michael gurstein Date: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 at 6:50 AM To: Mike Godwin , 'Internet Governance Caucus List' , 'bestbits' Subject: RE: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study Mike, Do I take you as saying below that you would trade (even the opportunity) of influence via democratic participation for the many; in return for the (in my opinion) illusion of not being "excluded" for the few via multistakeholderism? M From: Mike Godwin (mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG) [mailto:mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG] Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 2:48 PM To: michael gurstein; 1Net List; Internet Governance Caucus List; bestbits Subject: RE: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study Convergence is not causality. Lots of interested stakeholders may legitimately prefer multistakeholder models from ones on which they are baseline excluded. Sent from my iPhone using Mail+ for Outlook From: michael gurstein Sent: 4/14/14, 4:07 PM To: 1Net List, Internet Governance Caucus List, bestbits Subject: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study I guess the below explains the overwhelming pressure from the USG to have multistakeholderism implemented for global (Internet) governance since MSism would be the political form through which oligarchies would exert (and mask) their power in global decision making processes. Of course it also suggests why significant elements of CS in Internet Governance processes would also support MSism since they are in many cases the direct beneficiaries of these oligarchies. M From: sid-l at googlegroups.com [mailto:sid-l at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sid Shniad Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 11:20 AM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/14 Common Dreams April 14, 2014 US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study "The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." by Eric Zuesse In America, money talks... and democracy dies under its crushing weight. (Photo: Shutterstock)A study, to appear in the Fall 2014 issue of the academic journal Perspectives on Politics, finds that the U.S. is no democracy, but instead an oligarchy, meaning profoundly corrupt, so that the answer to the study's opening question, "Who governs? Who really rules?" in this country, is: "Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But, ..." and then they go on to say, it's not true, and that, "America's claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened" by the findings in this, the first-ever comprehensive scientific study of the subject, which shows that there is instead "the nearly total failure of 'median voter' and other Majoritarian Electoral Democracy theories [of America]. When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." To put it short: The United States is no democracy, but actually an oligarchy. The authors of this historically important study are Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page, and their article is titled "Testing Theories of American Politics." The authors clarify that the data available are probably under-representing the actual extent of control of the U.S. by the super-rich: Economic Elite Domination theories do rather well in our analysis, even though our findings probably understate the political influence of elites. Our measure of the preferences of wealthy or elite Americans - though useful, and the best we could generate for a large set of policy cases - is probably less consistent with the relevant preferences than are our measures of the views of ordinary citizens or the alignments of engaged interest groups. Yet we found substantial estimated effects even when using this imperfect measure. The real-world impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater. Nonetheless, this is the first-ever scientific study of the question of whether the U.S. is a democracy. "Until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions [that U.S. policymaking operates as a democracy, versus as an oligarchy, versus as some mixture of the two] against each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues." That's an enormous number of policy-issues studied. What the authors are able to find, despite the deficiencies of the data, is important: the first-ever scientific analysis of whether the U.S. is a democracy, or is instead an oligarchy, or some combination of the two. The clear finding is that the U.S. is an oligarchy, no democratic country, at all. American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media). The U.S., in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious "electoral" "democratic" countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now. Today, after this exhaustive analysis of the data, "the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." That's it, in a nutshell. Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sid-l" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sid-l+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. !DSPAM:2676,534c26bd215691645816401! Click here to report this email as spam. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From babatope at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 08:19:46 2014 From: babatope at gmail.com (Babatope Soremi) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:19:46 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <3E5FA9C5-7BC8-442F-8A5C-53B62A00E838@apc.org> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <3E5FA9C5-7BC8-442F-8A5C-53B62A00E838@apc.org> Message-ID: Congrats Nnenna. +1 to Anriette's points with perhaps particular focus on the need to ensure trust is not lost by users owing to recent developments regarding invasive surveillance techniques deployed by governments specifically On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Valeria Betancourt wrote: > + 1 on Anriette’s points. > > El 15/04/2014, a las 2:44, Anriette Esterhuysen > escribió: > > Congrats Nnenna! > > Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working > inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly > those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very > different from putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard > work, change in behaviour, change in structures and procedures, > consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always > agree. It also requires a common framework of principles that defines what > the public interest is in internet governance that can be used to promote > and protect this public interest across the internet governance ecosystem > and it is this framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. > > You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - > mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to > deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder > internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross > that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be > discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with > solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. > > Anriette > > On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > > + 1 > jeanette > > Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: > > Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! > *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM > *To:* Governance ; > mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society > major issues > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack > one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > Nnenna > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org > executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org > po box 29755, melville 2109 > south africa > tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 > > -- Babatope Soremi A destructive means can not bring about a constructive end.... TB Quality is never an accident. It is always the result of intelligent effort. *John Ruskin * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 08:30:41 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:30:41 -0400 Subject: [governance] NETmundial documents online for comment In-Reply-To: <749AA860-B2CF-4C8A-B783-073C6C4F9E9D@glocom.ac.jp> References: <749AA860-B2CF-4C8A-B783-073C6C4F9E9D@glocom.ac.jp> Message-ID: Thank you Adam and Joana. Just to underscore that 21st is next Monday. Deirdre On 14 April 2014 22:36, Adam Peake wrote: > Please see Use the Navigate button. > > Comments will close April 21th, 12:00 UTC. > > Adam > > > > WELCOME TO NETMUNDIAL PUBLIC COMMENTS PAGE > > After an open call for content contribution, NETmundial – the Global > Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance – received > 188 documents from 46 different countries. These documents were sent by > representatives of Civil Society, Private Sector, Academy, Governments and > Technical Community. > > Based on these broad set of inputs, NETmundial’s Executive > Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) prepared a Draft Outcome Document and > submitted it for consultation with NETmundial’s High-level Multistakeholder > Committee (HLMC) on April 3rd, 2014. After incorporating the inputs from > the HLMC, under the guidance of NETmundial’s Chair and Co-Chairs, a final > version of the document is released here for public comments. The public > consultation will be open for comments on NETmundial’s Executive Committee > Output Document from April 14th until April 21th, 12:00 UTC. > > For this public consultation a commenting tool is available online at > http://document.netmundial.br/ with the purpose of receiving public > comments on specific points of the document. It is not necessary to create > an account in order to post your comment to the document. You’ll be able to > immediately start reading the document and whenever you have something to > say, you’ll just have to provide a full name and contact email address > alongside your comment. > > By clicking on any paragraph of the document, you’ll be able to see all > the comments other people have already made pertaining to that portion of > the text; as referred above, you are also granted the possibility to > register your own observations. Maybe your concern was already addressed in > someone else’s comment, so please be sure to take a look at the previous > comments before making yours. > > This public consultation closes the loop that started by collecting public > content contributions. Such contributions were compiled and merged into the > Outcome Document by the NETmundial EMC and HLMC committees in the spirit of > trying to represent the overall context of the current Internet Governance > debate. It is very important to receive further public input in this final > stage, so that the outcome is true to the issues and concerns presented by > all stakeholders. > > END > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Apr 15 08:47:50 2014 From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com (Fatima Cambronero) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:47:50 -0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <3E5FA9C5-7BC8-442F-8A5C-53B62A00E838@apc.org> Message-ID: Congrats Nnenna and thanks for representing us! I also support Anriette's points, especially those about trust, and I would add: -a REAL participation of civil society and Internet users in IG ecosystem > related to capacity building to allow that participation -infrastructure (development/access to) < it is still an issue in many of our developing countries -human rights: freedom of expression, privacy, freedom of association (respect to) -Openness, accountability, transparency, inclusiveness -Bottom-up and multistakeholder processes Thanks. Best Regards, Fatima 2014-04-15 9:19 GMT-03:00 Babatope Soremi : > Congrats Nnenna. > > +1 to Anriette's points with perhaps particular focus on the need to > ensure trust is not lost by users owing to recent developments regarding > invasive surveillance techniques deployed by governments specifically > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Valeria Betancourt wrote: > >> + 1 on Anriette's points. >> >> El 15/04/2014, a las 2:44, Anriette Esterhuysen >> escribió: >> >> Congrats Nnenna! >> >> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working >> inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly >> those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very >> different from putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard >> work, change in behaviour, change in structures and procedures, >> consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always >> agree. It also requires a common framework of principles that defines what >> the public interest is in internet governance that can be used to promote >> and protect this public interest across the internet governance ecosystem >> and it is this framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >> >> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - >> mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to >> deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder >> internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross >> that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be >> discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with >> solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. >> >> Anriette >> >> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >> >> + 1 >> jeanette >> >> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >> >> Congratulations Nnenna - great choice! >> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >> *To:* Governance ; >> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >> major issues >> Dear all, >> >> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me >> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >> >> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >> >> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into >> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues >> will be overlooked. >> >> >> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >> >> Hope we can pull this off well. >> >> All for now >> >> Nnenna >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org >> executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org >> po box 29755, melville 2109 >> south africa >> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To 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 >> >> > > > -- > Babatope Soremi > > A destructive means can not bring about a constructive end.... > > TB > > > Quality is never an accident. It is always the result of intelligent > effort. > > *John Ruskin * > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Tue Apr 15 08:55:56 2014 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Mwendwa Kivuva) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 15:55:56 +0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <3E5FA9C5-7BC8-442F-8A5C-53B62A00E838@apc.org> Message-ID: Nnenna, do not mince words. To echo Anriette's wisdom:- Privacy and surveillance are very key issues. Indeed, NSA's surveillance of President Rousseff's communication was the precursor to the meeting. Mass Surveillance is a serious case of violation of human rights and civil liberties, it is disrespectful and destroy's trust on the Internet. Also point out that All stakeholders have an equal voice and should be allowed to participate "as peers on equal footing" ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya twitter.com/lordmwesh On 15 April 2014 15:19, Babatope Soremi wrote: > Congrats Nnenna. > > +1 to Anriette's points with perhaps particular focus on the need to > ensure trust is not lost by users owing to recent developments regarding > invasive surveillance techniques deployed by governments specifically > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Valeria Betancourt wrote: > >> + 1 on Anriette's points. >> >> El 15/04/2014, a las 2:44, Anriette Esterhuysen >> escribió: >> >> Congrats Nnenna! >> >> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working >> inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly >> those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very >> different from putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard >> work, change in behaviour, change in structures and procedures, >> consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always >> agree. It also requires a common framework of principles that defines what >> the public interest is in internet governance that can be used to promote >> and protect this public interest across the internet governance ecosystem >> and it is this framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >> >> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - >> mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to >> deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder >> internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross >> that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be >> discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with >> solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. >> >> Anriette >> >> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >> >> + 1 >> jeanette >> >> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >> >> Congratulations Nnenna - great choice! >> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >> *To:* Governance ; >> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >> major issues >> Dear all, >> >> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me >> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >> >> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >> >> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into >> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues >> will be overlooked. >> >> >> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >> >> Hope we can pull this off well. >> >> All for now >> >> Nnenna >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org >> executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org >> po box 29755, melville 2109 >> south africa >> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To 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 >> >> > > > -- > Babatope Soremi > > A destructive means can not bring about a constructive end.... > > TB > > > Quality is never an accident. It is always the result of intelligent > effort. > > *John Ruskin * > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 Tue Apr 15 09:02:05 2014 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 06:02:05 -0700 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> Congrats Nnenna, Since you are asking for suggestions for points to cover I would suggest the following: 1. A formal commitment/re-commitment to the Internet for the Common Good/in the Public Interest… I only see minor and off-handed references to this in the NetMundial statement but there needs to be a full-on commitment/re-commitment to this. This is especially the case given the risks of fragmentation/privatization of interests a “stakeholder” approach to Internet governance presents. 2. Framing/reframing “multistakeholderism” as a useful element in policy consultation and development, with suitable measures being in place to ensure the probity and accountability of these processes, within the context of democratic decision making. I like the phrase “multistakeholder dialogue in a democratic framework”. 3. Linking Internet Governance with social (and economic) justice. The Internet is becoming a dominant means for economic activity and wealth distribution/redistribution. Internet Governance, which in the NetMundial document is extended to include the “Right to Development” needs also to address social justice issues which are rapidly becoming the dominant issues of our time. 4. Finding the means to allow the widest range of voices into the Internet Governance dialogue. What this means is going beyond simple “capacity building” which ultimately can only enable the few, into designing processes and mechanisms which allow for the many to have a useful understanding of the broader issues and mechanisms to give voice and have those voices heard. Good luck with it. Mike From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Nnenna Nwakanma Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 11:36 PM To: Governance; bestbits at lists.bestbits.netso Subject: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Dear all, I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues will be overlooked. I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a draft/keypoints will be Monday. Hope we can pull this off well. All for now Nnenna -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From fsylla at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 09:04:04 2014 From: fsylla at gmail.com (Fatimata Seye Sylla) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:04:04 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <3E5FA9C5-7BC8-442F-8A5C-53B62A00E838@apc.org> Message-ID: Congratulations Nnenna! +1 Anriette +1 Izumi And I am sure Nnenna, you will stress on youth and women's inclusion and participation in IG in developing countries. Fatimata 2014-04-15 12:55 GMT+00:00 Mwendwa Kivuva : > Nnenna, do not mince words. To echo Anriette's wisdom:- > > Privacy and surveillance are very key issues. Indeed, NSA's surveillance of > President Rousseff's communication was the precursor to the meeting. Mass > Surveillance is a serious case of violation of human rights and civil > liberties, it is disrespectful and destroy's trust on the Internet. > > Also point out that All stakeholders have an equal voice and should be > allowed to participate "as peers on equal footing" > > ______________________ > Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya > twitter.com/lordmwesh > > > > On 15 April 2014 15:19, Babatope Soremi wrote: >> >> Congrats Nnenna. >> >> +1 to Anriette's points with perhaps particular focus on the need to >> ensure trust is not lost by users owing to recent developments regarding >> invasive surveillance techniques deployed by governments specifically >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Valeria Betancourt >> wrote: >>> >>> + 1 on Anriette’s points. >>> >>> El 15/04/2014, a las 2:44, Anriette Esterhuysen >>> escribió: >>> >>> Congrats Nnenna! >>> >>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working >>> inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly those >>> that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very different from >>> putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard work, change in >>> behaviour, change in structures and procedures, consultation, respect, >>> trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always agree. It also requires a >>> common framework of principles that defines what the public interest is in >>> internet governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this framework >>> that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>> >>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - >>> mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to deny >>> accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder >>> internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross >>> that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be >>> discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with >>> solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. >>> >>> Anriette >>> >>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>> >>> + 1 >>> jeanette >>> >>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>> >>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>> *To:* Governance ; >>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>> major issues >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me >>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>> >>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>> >>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into >>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues >>> will be overlooked. >>> >>> >>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>> >>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>> >>> All for now >>> >>> Nnenna >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> 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 >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> To be removed from the list, visit: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >>> >>> For all other list information and functions, see: >>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>> To 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 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Babatope Soremi >> >> A destructive means can not bring about a constructive end.... >> >> TB >> >> >> Quality is never an accident. It is always the result of intelligent >> effort. >> >> John Ruskin >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To 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 > -- Fatimata Seye Sylla ICT4D, Education & Genre -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 09:11:11 2014 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:11:11 -0300 Subject: [governance] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <534D2FEF.80701@cafonso.ca> This is great news! I want to hear your powerful voice and ideas make the walls of Hyatt (and all stakeholders present) tremble! It would be too arrogant on my part to dare to try putting words in your mouth. You know what to say. Congratulations, Nnenna! See you soon. --c.a. On 04/15/2014 03:35 AM, Nnenna Nwakanma wrote: > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack > one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > 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 salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 09:11:21 2014 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 01:11:21 +1200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <3E5FA9C5-7BC8-442F-8A5C-53B62A00E838@apc.org> Message-ID: Remind them that as the discussions ensue that we be mindful that decisions, influences made will affect diverse communities who may be under-represented at the Net Mundial. Noting that the timespan of the call for submissions were made in haste and would have ensured a fragment of views from the world. Principles such as stewardship, accountability, transparency are key. The conflict in definitions of "governance" whether this is "narrow" or "wide" continues to impact debate, dialogue and discussions. Whilst there is both light handed and heavy handed regulations of various aspects of the Internet, it is critical that the community agree on principles of Internet Governance that can help get the discussions rolling from a neutral platform. We are witnessing a war that to some degree is influenced by geopolitics, market power, struggle to be heard that at times global public interest can be easily marginalised. We have to find room to hear not only the "loud" voices but also the "lone" voices in the desert. Inclusion, meaningful participation, humility to listen to diverse voices is essential for authentic dialogue and engagement where we talk to each other and not at each other. Sometimes as stakeholders, we can be so focussed with hearing our own voices that we miss hearing what others have to say. It will require a level of give and take from each other so that all stakeholder groups - civil society, private sector and public sector can engage. The degree in which they are able to collaborate and engage will determine tomorrow's landscape. On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:55 AM, Mwendwa Kivuva < Kivuva at transworldafrica.com> wrote: > Nnenna, do not mince words. To echo Anriette's wisdom:- > > Privacy and surveillance are very key issues. Indeed, NSA's surveillance > of President Rousseff's communication was the precursor to the meeting. > Mass Surveillance is a serious case of violation of human rights and civil > liberties, it is disrespectful and destroy's trust on the Internet. > > Also point out that All stakeholders have an equal voice and should be > allowed to participate "as peers on equal footing" > > ______________________ > Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya > twitter.com/lordmwesh > > > > On 15 April 2014 15:19, Babatope Soremi wrote: > >> Congrats Nnenna. >> >> +1 to Anriette's points with perhaps particular focus on the need to >> ensure trust is not lost by users owing to recent developments regarding >> invasive surveillance techniques deployed by governments specifically >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Valeria Betancourt wrote: >> >>> + 1 on Anriette's points. >>> >>> El 15/04/2014, a las 2:44, Anriette Esterhuysen >>> escribió: >>> >>> Congrats Nnenna! >>> >>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that working >>> inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, particularly >>> those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society - is very >>> different from putting on a colourful West African outfit :) It takes hard >>> work, change in behaviour, change in structures and procedures, >>> consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, because do not always >>> agree. It also requires a common framework of principles that defines what >>> the public interest is in internet governance that can be used to promote >>> and protect this public interest across the internet governance ecosystem >>> and it is this framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>> >>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only - >>> mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, and to >>> deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for multi-stakeholder >>> internet governance? I think it would be good to get the message accross >>> that the IANA transition is not the only issue that NetMundial should be >>> discussing, but at the same time, it is a key opportunity to come up with >>> solutions and approaches that are not simply cosmetic. >>> >>> Anriette >>> >>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>> >>> + 1 >>> jeanette >>> >>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>> >>> Congratulations Nnenna - great choice! >>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>> *To:* Governance ; >>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>> major issues >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me >>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>> >>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>> >>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into >>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues >>> will be overlooked. >>> >>> >>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>> >>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>> >>> All for now >>> >>> Nnenna >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org >>> executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org >>> po box 29755, melville 2109 >>> south africa >>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> To be removed from the list, visit: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >>> >>> For all other list information and functions, see: >>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>> To 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 >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Babatope Soremi >> >> A destructive means can not bring about a constructive end.... >> >> TB >> >> >> Quality is never an accident. It is always the result of intelligent >> effort. >> >> *John Ruskin * >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To 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 kichango at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 09:37:46 2014 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:37:46 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study In-Reply-To: References: <1DEB7534D981B444BF234789326B22A8AF08BDFC51@MBX.INTERNEWS.LOCAL> <079f01cf5898$762b5ba0$628212e0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Mike Godwin (mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG) < mgodwin at internews.org> wrote: > My own personal view, which I have to stress does not purport to represent > my employer, is more nuanced. I think all governments, from the most > democratic to the most authoritarian, share certain self-perceptions and > assumptions that tend to run against the radically democratic > potentialities of online media. (In my own work, I run into this constantly > -- the perception that the internet is so inherently disruptive that it must > be controlled in one way or another. It's how, until very recently, > democratic governments even thought of the traditional press.) This isn't > malice or selfishness -- instead, this is an "occupational hazard" if your > occupation is being a government, and nobody is immune, really. > Multi-stakeholderism at its best, in my view, formalizes the necessity of > taking input from non-governmental "outsiders." I think that's the right > outcome, democratically speaking. (I also happen to think that the USG's > favoring multi-stakeholderism--at least as it does right now--is a happy > circumstance, because institutional governmental self-interest over the > long term tends to favor governmental--or inter-governmental--bodies most > of the time.) > > So my "solution space" for internet governance tends to center on > multi-stakeholderism, clearly, but of course multi-stakeholderism has to be > structured correctly, and multi-stakeholderism is to be valued not in > itself but to the extent that it serves democratic values. > Exactly the direction that my own thinking... But I am still to write my self-promised piece on MSism :) > (A multistakeholder system favoring corporate dominance is no better than > one favoring institutional government dominance, and of course, as I think > you agree, might be worse.) By contrast, I don't view the ITU (for example) > as being a leading candidate for serving those values. > > We have a number of models to pick from. And as Laura DeNardis suggests in > her recent writings, we may actually need to pick different models for > different particular governance spaces and roles. > The only way that makes sense. I think one of the biggest problem we have been facing in our discussion of MSism is that many people are confusing different level of analysis (thus confusing or mis-characterizing aspects of the phenomena to be analyzed.) MSism is a decision-making process and I don't know where anyone could have possibly taken that bogus idea that MSism is the next big thing after democracy (just like democracy once was that next big thing after tyranny, aristocracy, etc.) Those two things are not contiguous (thus mutually exclusive) phenomena on the same plane (say, the timeline of history.) We still are in the era of democracy the benefits of which many peoples on earth are still waiting for. Democracy is not only about voting (it's not even exhaustively defined by that) and exclusively for nation-state governments. It is about getting the consent of the governed (through the inclusion of their concerns) to the matters of governing -- whatever is being governed. It's not because historically, democracy has reached its highest peak (in terms of the maximum people being involved) in the context of national governments where people freely vote that that has to be the only way democracy can be operationalized, much less the only possible meaning for its concept. When the Greeks coined the word to mean the rule of the people, did people vote? Free citizenship was only extended to a subset of people (probably still a numerical minority) excluding slaves and women, although presumably a larger elite than the one that exclusively ruled before democracy was established. It's not even clear to me whether those free citizens went to the poll to vote as we do today. And until the second half of last century, there were many suffrage movements to extend citizenship to women and (political) minorities for the right to vote, including in very developed countries. So democracy as a concept cannot be frozen into the practice of voting as we know it today (one person, one vote) in the sole context of nation-sates. It an idea that is still with us and still fully has its relevance while we are experimenting with emergent collective decision-making ideas and practices such as MSism. In that sense, as a decision-making process MSism can prove to be more, or less, democratic, in the sense of getting the consent of the governed (through the inclusion of their concerns) to the matters of governing. If it survives its infancy and grows robust, the specific value MSism may be said to bring is the ability to make collective decisions, particularly policy decisions, at supra- and transnational level where governments are not the only participants or direct actors (I locate the primary value at that level because so far it seems in supra-national spaces, policy decisions have been made directly by government reps voting while in sub-national spaces a full and well-implemented operationalization of democratic principles may lead to outcomes that are as good and legitimate as MSism applied in those spaces.) As a collective decision-making mechanisms chosen from various models to fit a particular governance space, each instance of MSism will be shaped and will perform based on the actors/stakeholders involved and the resources and tools available in that space. As a result, with multi-stakeholderism the devil will ALWAYS be in the detail (not to say MSism is the only thing for which this applies, so please don't start another useless discussion on this particular point, thanks.) P.S. Sorry, maybe I should have posted this in the MSism thread... I didn't mean to be that elaborate when I begun to reply. But, hey, that's what it is. Mawaki > > --Mike > > -- > > *Mike Godwin* | Senior Legal Advisor, Global Internet Policy Project > > mgodwin at internews.org | *Mobile* 415-793-4446 > > *Skype* mnemonic1026 > > *Address* 1601 R Street NW, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20009 USA > > > > *INTERNEWS* | *Local Voices. Global Change.* > > www.internews.org | @internews | > facebook.com/internews > > From: michael gurstein > Date: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 at 6:50 AM > To: Mike Godwin , 'Internet Governance Caucus > List' , 'bestbits' < > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> > > Subject: RE: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says > Scientific Study > > Mike, > > > > Do I take you as saying below that you would trade (even the opportunity) > of influence via democratic participation for the many; in return for the > (in my opinion) illusion of not being "excluded" for the few via > multistakeholderism? > > > > M > > > > *From:* Mike Godwin (mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG) [mailto:mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG] > > *Sent:* Monday, April 14, 2014 2:48 PM > *To:* michael gurstein; 1Net List; Internet Governance Caucus List; > bestbits > *Subject:* RE: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says > Scientific Study > > > > > Convergence is not causality. Lots of interested stakeholders may > legitimately prefer multistakeholder models from ones on which they are > baseline excluded. > > > > > Sent from my iPhone using Mail+ for Outlook > > *From:* michael gurstein > *Sent:* 4/14/14, 4:07 PM > *To:* 1Net List, Internet Governance Caucus List, bestbits > *Subject:* [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says > Scientific Study > > I guess the below explains the overwhelming pressure from the USG to have > multistakeholderism implemented for global (Internet) governance since > MSism would be the political form through which oligarchies would exert > (and mask) their power in global decision making processes. > > > > Of course it also suggests why significant elements of CS in Internet > Governance processes would also support MSism since they are in many cases > the direct beneficiaries of these oligarchies. > > > > M > > > > *From:* sid-l at googlegroups.com [mailto:sid-l at googlegroups.com] > *On Behalf Of *Sid Shniad > *Sent:* Monday, April 14, 2014 11:20 AM > *To:* undisclosed-recipients: > *Subject:* US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study > > > > > > *http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/14 > Common Dreams April 14, > 2014 * > US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study > > > > *"The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, > near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." by > Eric Zuesse* > > In America, money talks... and democracy dies under its crushing weight. > (Photo: Shutterstock)A study, > to appear in the Fall 2014 issue of the academic journal *Perspectives on > Politics*, finds that the U.S. is no democracy, but instead an oligarchy, > meaning profoundly corrupt, so that the answer to the study's opening > question, "Who governs? Who really rules?" in this country, is: > > "Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for > theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of > the American public actually have little influence over the policies our > government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic > governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, > and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But, ..." and then they go > on to say, it's not true, and that, "America's claims to being a democratic > society are seriously threatened" by the findings in this, the first-ever > comprehensive scientific study of the subject, which shows that there is > instead "the nearly total failure of 'median voter' and other Majoritarian > Electoral Democracy theories [of America]. When the preferences of economic > elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the > preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, > near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." > > To put it short: The United States is no democracy, but actually an > oligarchy. > > The authors of this historically important study are Martin Gilens and > Benjamin I. Page, and their article is titled "Testing Theories of > American Politics." The > authors clarify that the data available are probably under-representing the > actual extent of control of the U.S. by the super-rich: > > Economic Elite Domination theories do rather well in our analysis, even > though our findings probably understate the political influence of elites. > Our measure of the preferences of wealthy or elite Americans - though > useful, and the best we could generate for a large set of policy cases - is > probably less consistent with the relevant preferences than are our > measures of the views of ordinary citizens or the alignments of engaged > interest groups. Yet we found substantial estimated effects even when using > this imperfect measure. The real-world impact of elites upon public policy > may be still greater. > > Nonetheless, this is the first-ever scientific study of the question of > whether the U.S. is a democracy. "Until recently it has not been possible > to test these contrasting theoretical predictions [that U.S. policymaking > operates as a democracy, versus as an oligarchy, versus as some mixture of > the two] against each other within a single statistical model. This paper > reports on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes > measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues." That's an enormous > number of policy-issues studied. > > What the authors are able to find, despite the deficiencies of the data, > is important: the first-ever scientific analysis of whether the U.S. is a > democracy, or is instead an oligarchy, or some combination of the two. The > clear finding is that the U.S. is an oligarchy, no democratic country, at > all. American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the > oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media). > The U.S., in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other > dubious "electoral" "democratic" countries. We weren't formerly, but we > clearly are now. Today, after this exhaustive analysis of the data, "the > preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, > near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy." That's > it, in a nutshell. > > Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of *They're > Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010* > *,*and of *CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.* > > > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Sid-l" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sid-l+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > !DSPAM:2676,534c26bd215691645816401! > > > > Click here to > report this email as spam. > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 09:47:26 2014 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 01:47:26 +1200 Subject: [governance] Commission welcomes European Parliament support for a safer, healthier, high-tech and more #Connected Continent Message-ID: Dear All, Aside from the Lunar Eclipse there are some really interesting things happening globally. The European Parliament has released its Press Release on making the rollout of broadband cheaper. Today the European Parliament voted on EU rules which would cut by 30% the cost of rolling out high-speed Internet. European Commission Vice-President @NeelieKroesEUsaid: "Broadband for all is not a promise! It is a commitment, of the EU, of the European Commission, of the Heads of States. Today's measures are another step towards delivering better internet for the Europeans. See: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-304_en.htm 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 parminder at itforchange.net Tue Apr 15 10:09:50 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 19:39:50 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study In-Reply-To: References: <1DEB7534D981B444BF234789326B22A8AF08BDFC51@MBX.INTERNEWS.LOCAL> <079f01cf5898$762b5ba0$628212e0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <534D3DAE.20100@itforchange.net> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 07:07 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > > SNIP > . So democracy as a concept cannot be frozen into the practice of > voting as we know it today (one person, one vote) in the sole context > of nation-sates. It may not be frozen into the practice of voting-- there is a huge amount of literature and practice of participatory democracy that says exactly that.. But, can we freeze in not having a vote for corporates - in fact multiple and exclusive votes, where ordinary people do not have votes... That is MS decision making... Why do we need to go beyond participatory democracy as the means of fulfilling the ideal of democracy and rather jump to MSism which is simply not democratic in a thousand way..... parminder > It an idea that is still with us and still fully has its relevance > while we are experimenting with emergent collective decision-making > ideas and practices such as MSism. > > In that sense, as a decision-making process MSism can prove to be > more, or less, democratic, in the sense of getting the consent of the > governed (through the inclusion of their concerns) to the matters of > governing. If it survives its infancy and grows robust, the specific > value MSism may be said to bring is the ability to make collective > decisions, particularly policy decisions, at supra- and transnational > level where governments are not the only participants or direct actors > (I locate the primary value at that level because so far it seems in > supra-national spaces, policy decisions have been made directly by > government reps voting while in sub-national spaces a full and > well-implemented operationalization of democratic principles may lead > to outcomes that are as good and legitimate as MSism applied in those > spaces.) > > As a collective decision-making mechanisms chosen from various models > to fit a particular governance space, each instance of MSism will be > shaped and will perform based on the actors/stakeholders involved and > the resources and tools available in that space. As a result, with > multi-stakeholderism the devil will ALWAYS be in the detail (not to > say MSism is the only thing for which this applies, so please don't > start another useless discussion on this particular point, thanks.) > > P.S. Sorry, maybe I should have posted this in the MSism thread... I > didn't mean to be that elaborate when I begun to reply. But, hey, > that's what it is. > > Mawaki > > > > —Mike > > -- > > *Mike Godwin* | Senior Legal Advisor, Global Internet Policy Project > > mgodwin at internews.org | *Mobile* > 415-793-4446 > > *Skype* mnemonic1026 > > *Address* 1601 R Street NW, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20009 USA > > *INTERNEWS*|***Local Voices. Global Change.* > > www.internews.org | @internews > | facebook.com/internews > > > > From: michael gurstein > > Date: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 at 6:50 AM > To: Mike Godwin >, 'Internet Governance Caucus List' > >, 'bestbits' > > > > Subject: RE: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, > says Scientific Study > > Mike, > > Do I take you as saying below that you would trade (even the > opportunity) of influence via democratic participation for the > many; in return for the (in my opinion) illusion of not being > “excluded” for the few via multistakeholderism? > > M > > *From:*Mike Godwin (mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG > ) [mailto:mgodwin at INTERNEWS.ORG] > *Sent:* Monday, April 14, 2014 2:48 PM > *To:* michael gurstein; 1Net List; Internet Governance Caucus > List; bestbits > *Subject:* RE: [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, > says Scientific Study > > > Convergence is not causality. Lots of interested stakeholders may > legitimately prefer multistakeholder models from ones on which > they are baseline excluded. > > > Sent from my iPhone using Mail+ for Outlook > > *From:*michael gurstein > *Sent:* 4/14/14, 4:07 PM > *To:* 1Net List, Internet Governance Caucus List, bestbits > *Subject:* [bestbits] FW: US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says > Scientific Study > > I guess the below explains the overwhelming pressure from the USG > to have multistakeholderism implemented for global (Internet) > governance since MSism would be the political form through which > oligarchies would exert (and mask) their power in global decision > making processes. > > Of course it also suggests why significant elements of CS in > Internet Governance processes would also support MSism since they > are in many cases the direct beneficiaries of these oligarchies. > > M > > *From:*sid-l at googlegroups.com > [mailto:sid-l at googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Sid Shniad > *Sent:* Monday, April 14, 2014 11:20 AM > *To:* undisclosed-recipients: > *Subject:* US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study > > *http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/14 > > Common Dreams April 14, 2014 * > > > US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study > > *“The preferences of the average American appear to have only a > minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon > public policy.” > > by Eric Zuesse* > > In America, money talks... and democracy dies under its crushing > weight. (Photo: Shutterstock)A study > , > to appear in the Fall 2014 issue of the academic journal > /Perspectives on Politics/, finds that the U.S. is no democracy, > but instead an oligarchy, meaning profoundly corrupt, so that the > answer to the study’s opening question, "Who governs? Who really > rules?" in this country, is: > > "Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous > studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses > suggest that majorities of the American public actually have > little influence over the policies our government adopts. > Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, > such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and > a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But, ..." and then > they go on to say, it's not true, and that, "America's claims to > being a democratic society are seriously threatened" by the > findings in this, the first-ever comprehensive scientific study of > the subject, which shows that there is instead "the nearly total > failure of 'median voter' and other Majoritarian Electoral > Democracy theories [of America]. When the preferences of economic > elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled > for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a > minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon > public policy." > > To put it short: The United States is no democracy, but actually > an oligarchy. > > The authors of this historically important study are Martin Gilens > and Benjamin I. Page, and their article is titled "Testing > Theories of American Politics." > The > authors clarify that the data available are probably > under-representing the actual extent of control of the U.S. by the > super-rich: > > Economic Elite Domination theories do rather well in our > analysis, even though our findings probably understate the > political influence of elites. Our measure of the preferences > of wealthy or elite Americans – though useful, and the best we > could generate for a large set of policy cases – is probably > less consistent with the relevant preferences than are our > measures of the views of ordinary citizens or the alignments > of engaged interest groups. Yet we found substantial estimated > effects even when using this imperfect measure. The real-world > impact of elites upon public policy may be still greater. > > Nonetheless, this is the first-ever scientific study of the > question of whether the U.S. is a democracy. "Until recently it > has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical > predictions [that U.S. policymaking operates as a democracy, > versus as an oligarchy, versus as some mixture of the two] against > each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports > on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes > measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues." That’s an > enormous number of policy-issues studied. > > What the authors are able to find, despite the deficiencies of the > data, is important: the first-ever scientific analysis of whether > the U.S. is a democracy, or is instead an oligarchy, or some > combination of the two. The clear finding is that the U.S. is an > oligarchy, no democratic country, at all. American democracy is a > sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the > country (and who control the nation's "news" media). The U.S., in > other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious > "electoral" "democratic" countries. We weren't formerly, but we > clearly are now. Today, after this exhaustive analysis of the > data, “the preferences of the average American appear to have only > a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon > public policy.” That's it, in a nutshell. > > Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, > of /They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic > Records, 1910-2010/ > /,/and > of /CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity./ > > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Sid-l" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an email to sid-l+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > !DSPAM:2676,534c26bd215691645816401! > > Click here > to > report this email as spam. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net Tue Apr 15 10:21:14 2014 From: jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net (Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 16:21:14 +0200 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Congrats Nnenna! May I add to Mike excellent comments, one point? Nnenna, I am not sure if you will be there intuitu personae, persona grata or representing some, part, or all of Civil society entities (?!), but just in case you represent some of our thoughts and opinions, I think it would be nice to mention that among civil society there are people who disagree with the equal stakeholder - equal rights - equal footing thinking and narrative. Stakeholder voices might all be equal, meaning equally audible, but that amusing "equal footing" expression doesn't mean that these respectable voices are legitimate or representative of anything, anyone, and properly checked and balanced. So equal voices with different rights, that might be interesting to explore. But equal footing meaning equal rights among stakeholders, that jungle is right the opposite of Democracy, where corporations are still not invited to make the law, and participate and seat in parliaments on an equal footing. The market seating in the Congress, I wish never to see that in my life. It sounds like some kind of very un-democratic thing. I do remember that some comments on these lists where made about civil servants (and their so called legendary inability to work without other people holding the pencil for them, which I tend to think as very untrue), and I know that governmental bashing is just the legitimate cousin of democratic bashing, but please voice equally and multistakeholderly that there are a diversity of views. We know that NetMundial will not be able to provide dialogue, but more some sort of convergence (+1...) out of magic wonder, still it would to see some principles are respected when it comes to express the diversity of views. Sorry for the ironic tone in that last sentence. JC Le 15 avr. 2014 à 15:02, michael gurstein a écrit :ung > Congrats Nnenna, > > Since you are asking for suggestions for points to cover I would suggest the following: > 1. A formal commitment/re-commitment to the Internet for the Common Good/in the Public Interest… I only see minor and off-handed references to this in the NetMundial statement but there needs to be a full-on commitment/re-commitment to this. This is especially the case given the risks of fragmentation/privatization of interests a “stakeholder” approach to Internet governance presents. > 2. Framing/reframing “multistakeholderism” as a useful element in policy consultation and development, with suitable measures being in place to ensure the probity and accountability of these processes, within the context of democratic decision making. I like the phrase “multistakeholder dialogue in a democratic framework”. > 3. Linking Internet Governance with social (and economic) justice. The Internet is becoming a dominant means for economic activity and wealth distribution/redistribution. Internet Governance, which in the NetMundial document is extended to include the “Right to Development” needs also to address social justice issues which are rapidly becoming the dominant issues of our time. > 4. Finding the means to allow the widest range of voices into the Internet Governance dialogue. What this means is going beyond simple “capacity building” which ultimately can only enable the few, into designing processes and mechanisms which allow for the many to have a useful understanding of the broader issues and mechanisms to give voice and have those voices heard. > Good luck with it. > > Mike > > From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Nnenna Nwakanma > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 11:36 PM > To: Governance; bestbits at lists.bestbits.netso > Subject: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues > > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues will be overlooked. > > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > > All for now > > 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 parminder at itforchange.net Tue Apr 15 10:29:20 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 19:59:20 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] multistakeholderism is democracy was Re: [] FW: US Is an O... In-Reply-To: <534D3E2C.6020609@acm.org> References: <1DEB7534D981B444BF234789326B22A8AF08BDFC51@MBX.INTERNEWS.LOCAL> <079f01cf5898$762b5ba0$628212e0$@gmail.com> <534D3E2C.6020609@acm.org> Message-ID: <534D4240.3040209@itforchange.net> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 07:41 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > On 15-Apr-14 09:37, Mawaki Chango wrote: >> MSism is a decision-making process and I don't know where anyone could >> have possibly taken that bogus idea that MSism is the next big thing >> after democracy (just like democracy once was that next big thing after >> tyranny, aristocracy, etc.) You had in your email sought focussing on actual practices... Therefore you need to look at practices of MSism... It is indeed the next thing after democracy, and NOT democracy... MSism gives big business a veto on public policy making. This kind of thing is impossible to even mention in a democratic discourse.. But the same unmentionable has been dressed by employment of huge expenditure of resources in the respectable clothes if MSism. Do you disagree that MSism as being practiced in its 'equal footing' model (1) gives veto power to big business and (2) such a thing is unattainable in democratic discourse and practice.. Now you may say that I am speaking about entirely imaginary models of MSism, and creatign strawmen of MSism... Well, no.. On the BestBit list an elaborate model has been developed and presented, latest in response to the leaked NetMundial draft (did you also support this model?) which creates a multistakeholder screening mechanism for taking up any public policy issue.. Does this not give big business a veto on what matters can be taken for public policy treatment? Is this democratic? Second, the NetMundial draft document seeks public policy making through consensus basis alone - which is an multistakeholder consensus on equal footing... It says that processes of governance have to be first be agreed by all stakeholders (keep reading business when I say stakeholders bec it is they for whom these models are fashioned).... Now, is it democratic to give business (big business, no one asked my corner shop guy) such structural vetos over public policy making? What could be more democratic... Since you said devil is in the details, lets talk about the detail and the devil... Lets talk specifics, and these above are the specifics of MSism... parminder > I am one who does argues that Multistakeholderism is not just another > decision making process. > > I also do not claim in is the next big thing after democracy. I argue > that it is a form of democracy. Multistakeholderism includes modalities > of democratic organization as well as a variety of mechanisms. It is > a form of participatory democracy that builds upon the varieties of > representational democracy that one finds in some countries and the > various forms of self-organization that people in society uses to > organize itself on issues of importance and brings them in the greater > democratic mix. > > I do agree that there is not just one form of the multistakeholder > model, but argue that there are attributes of Multistakeholderism as > participatory democracy that are necessary. > > I too have yet to finish my self-promised work on multistakeholderism. > Though I have written on this a bit. > > 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 parminder at itforchange.net Tue Apr 15 10:44:26 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 20:14:26 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] free flow of information @ Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534D382C.5030502@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <534D45CA.1070200@itforchange.net> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 07:49 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > SNIP > > I hope it represents progress. How we moved on since Tunis -- just look at the statements about Human Rights. What chance of those being considered a few years ago. And much more. Dont know what you are talking about. You sure have read WSIS docs, right? > > Everything could be better, but I am quite satisfied we are making progress. There is no progress... It is going backwards, and steeply... BTW, do you think democracy is a human right, or it isnt... What is your comment on this human right not only being absent in the initial text but also not being included when a few HLC members asked for it. Will really like to know parminder > > Please comment on the documents. > > Adam > > > > >> jeanette >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 10:55:03 2014 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:55:03 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] multistakeholderism is democracy was Re: [] FW: US Is an O... In-Reply-To: <534D4240.3040209@itforchange.net> References: <1DEB7534D981B444BF234789326B22A8AF08BDFC51@MBX.INTERNEWS.LOCAL> <079f01cf5898$762b5ba0$628212e0$@gmail.com> <534D3E2C.6020609@acm.org> <534D4240.3040209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 9:29 AM, parminder wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 April 2014 07:41 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> >> On 15-Apr-14 09:37, Mawaki Chango wrote: >>> >>> MSism is a decision-making process and I don't know where anyone could >>> have possibly taken that bogus idea that MSism is the next big thing > > Do you disagree that MSism as being practiced in its 'equal footing' model > (1) gives veto power to big business I disagree with this, yes. In my experience in multiple MS processes, no one has a "veto". -- 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 ajp at glocom.ac.jp Tue Apr 15 12:22:20 2014 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 01:22:20 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] free flow of information @ Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534D45CA.1070200@itforchange.net> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534D382C.5030502@wzb.eu> <534D45CA.1070200@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Apr 15, 2014, at 11:44 PM, parminder wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 April 2014 07:49 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >> SNIP >> >> I hope it represents progress. How we moved on since Tunis -- just look at the statements about Human Rights. What chance of those being considered a few years ago. And much more. > > Dont know what you are talking about. You sure have read WSIS docs, right? > > Thanks Parminder. The documents are open for comment. Adam >> >> Everything could be better, but I am quite satisfied we are making progress. > > There is no progress... It is going backwards, and steeply... BTW, do you think democracy is a human right, or it isnt... What is your comment on this human right not only being absent in the initial text but also not being included when a few HLC members asked for it. Will really like to know > > parminder >> >> Please comment on the documents. >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> >>> jeanette >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To 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 andrea at digitalpolicy.it Tue Apr 15 13:26:09 2014 From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 19:26:09 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: NETmundial / European Commission to facilitate a conference call for information sharing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote: > [ *Apologies if you receive this message multiple times. Please share > with your contacts.* ] > > > > In view of the forthcoming Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future > of Internet Governance (NETMundial, http://www.netmundial.br/) which will > take place in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on 23-24 April 2014, the European > Commission is organising an open conference call, with the purpose of > sharing information among stakeholders. > Please note that a summary of the"information sharing" conference call on NETmundial, which the European Commission hosted and chaired on 8.4.2014, is now available at http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/netmundial-european-commission-facilitate-conference-call-information-sharing-0(scroll down to "Related Documents" and click on "Agenda and Minutes"). All the 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From anja at internetdemocracy.in Tue Apr 15 14:34:22 2014 From: anja at internetdemocracy.in (Anja Kovacs) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 00:04:22 +0530 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Congrats, Nnenna! This is very good news indeed. Many good proposals have been made already. Following up on Anriette's comments on multistakeholderism and trust, I would in particularly like to support recommendations to not just mention the struggle of engaging with multiple stakeholders etc, but also the urgent need for checks and balances, including transparency and accountability, and appropriate action where these standards are violated. It might be worthwhile to add that if such efforts are not stepped up, support from multistakeholderism will erode quickly as trust in the system will simply have disappeared. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input and make proposals - much appreciated. Anja On 15 April 2014 19:51, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal < jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote: > Congrats Nnenna! > > May I add to Mike excellent comments, one point? > > Nnenna, I am not sure if you will be there *intuitu personae, persona > grata *or representing some, part, or all of Civil society entities (?!), > but just in case you represent some of our thoughts and opinions, I think > it would be nice to mention that among civil society there are people who > disagree with the *equal stakeholder - equal rights - equal footing* thinking and narrative. Stakeholder voices might all be equal, meaning > equally audible, but that amusing "equal footing" expression doesn't mean > that these respectable voices are legitimate or representative of anything, > anyone, and properly checked and balanced. So equal voices with different > rights, that might be interesting to explore. But equal footing meaning > equal rights among stakeholders, that jungle is right the opposite of > Democracy, where corporations are still not invited to make the law, and > participate and seat in parliaments on an equal footing. The *market*seating in the Congress, I wish never to see that in my life. It sounds > like some kind of very un-democratic thing. I do remember that some > comments on these lists where made about civil servants (and their so > called legendary inability to work without other people holding the pencil > for them, which I tend to think as very untrue), and I know that > governmental bashing is just the legitimate cousin of democratic bashing, > but please voice equally and multistakeholderly that there are a diversity > of views. We know that NetMundial will not be able to provide dialogue, but > more some sort of convergence (+1...) out of magic wonder, still it would > to see some principles are respected when it comes to express the diversity > of views. > > Sorry for the ironic tone in that last sentence. > > JC > > Le 15 avr. 2014 à 15:02, michael gurstein a écrit :ung > > Congrats Nnenna, > > Since you are asking for suggestions for points to cover I would suggest > the following: > 1. A formal commitment/re-commitment to the Internet for the Common > Good/in the Public Interest... I only see minor and off-handed references to > this in the NetMundial statement but there needs to be a full-on > commitment/re-commitment to this. This is especially the case given the > risks of fragmentation/privatization of interests a "stakeholder" approach > to Internet governance presents. > 2. Framing/reframing "multistakeholderism" as a useful element in > policy consultation and development, with suitable measures being in place > to ensure the probity and accountability of these processes, within the > context of democratic decision making. I like the phrase "multistakeholder > dialogue in a democratic framework". > 3. Linking Internet Governance with social (and economic) justice. > The Internet is becoming a dominant means for economic activity and wealth > distribution/redistribution. Internet Governance, which in the NetMundial > document is extended to include the "Right to Development" needs also to > address social justice issues which are rapidly becoming the dominant > issues of our time. > 4. Finding the means to allow the widest range of voices into the > Internet Governance dialogue. What this means is going beyond simple > "capacity building" which ultimately can only enable the few, into > designing processes and mechanisms which allow for the many to have a > useful understanding of the broader issues and mechanisms to give voice and > have those voices heard. > Good luck with it. > > Mike > > *From:* bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto: > bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] *On Behalf Of *Nnenna Nwakanma > *Sent:* Monday, April 14, 2014 11:36 PM > *To:* Governance; bestbits at lists.bestbits.netso > *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society > major issues > > > Dear all, > > I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me > to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one > of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. > > I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society > perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". > > There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into > place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues > will be overlooked. > > I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a > draft/keypoints will be Monday. > > Hope we can pull this off well. > All for now > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- Dr. Anja Kovacs The Internet Democracy Project +91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs www.internetdemocracy.in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net Tue Apr 15 15:12:54 2014 From: jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net (Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 21:12:54 +0200 Subject: [governance] Government and innovation Message-ID: <2FB96B57-B445-4226-BE50-1E28C59B2672@theglobaljournal.net> I think this is of interest, thanks to the New York Review of Books, specially for the usual government bashing multitude. Innovation and the Government Jeff Madrick A new book makes a forceful case for the value and competence of government itself, and for its ability to do what the private sector simply cannot. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/apr/24/innovation-government-was-crucial-after-all/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=April+15+2014&utm_content=April+15+2014+CID_8a397ba65c247c05c90bf915a78ff13b&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=Innovation%20and%20the%20Government __________________________ Jean-Christophe Nothias Editor in Chief jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net @jc_nothias Follow us on Twitter and Like us on Facebook Follow my Op-Eds at the Huffington Post US www.theglobaljournal.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Global_logo-175x50px.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14790 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 ekenyanito at gmail.com Tue Apr 15 15:17:22 2014 From: ekenyanito at gmail.com (Ephraim Percy Kenyanito) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 22:17:22 +0300 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> Message-ID: +1 on Anja's conments. Best, Ephraim Percy Kenyanito On Apr 15, 2014 9:34 PM, "Anja Kovacs" wrote: > Congrats, Nnenna! This is very good news indeed. > > Many good proposals have been made already. Following up on Anriette's > comments on multistakeholderism and trust, I would in particularly like to > support recommendations to not just mention the struggle of engaging with > multiple stakeholders etc, but also the urgent need for checks and > balances, including transparency and accountability, and appropriate action > where these standards are violated. It might be worthwhile to add that if > such efforts are not stepped up, support from multistakeholderism will > erode quickly as trust in the system will simply have disappeared. > > Thank you for the opportunity to provide input and make proposals - much > appreciated. > > Anja > > > > > On 15 April 2014 19:51, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal < > jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote: > >> Congrats Nnenna! >> >> May I add to Mike excellent comments, one point? >> >> Nnenna, I am not sure if you will be there *intuitu personae, persona >> grata *or representing some, part, or all of Civil society entities >> (?!), but just in case you represent some of our thoughts and opinions, I >> think it would be nice to mention that among civil society there are people >> who disagree with the *equal stakeholder - equal rights - equal footing* thinking and narrative. Stakeholder voices might all be equal, meaning >> equally audible, but that amusing "equal footing" expression doesn't mean >> that these respectable voices are legitimate or representative of anything, >> anyone, and properly checked and balanced. So equal voices with different >> rights, that might be interesting to explore. But equal footing meaning >> equal rights among stakeholders, that jungle is right the opposite of >> Democracy, where corporations are still not invited to make the law, and >> participate and seat in parliaments on an equal footing. The *market*seating in the Congress, I wish never to see that in my life. It sounds >> like some kind of very un-democratic thing. I do remember that some >> comments on these lists where made about civil servants (and their so >> called legendary inability to work without other people holding the pencil >> for them, which I tend to think as very untrue), and I know that >> governmental bashing is just the legitimate cousin of democratic bashing, >> but please voice equally and multistakeholderly that there are a diversity >> of views. We know that NetMundial will not be able to provide dialogue, but >> more some sort of convergence (+1...) out of magic wonder, still it would >> to see some principles are respected when it comes to express the diversity >> of views. >> >> Sorry for the ironic tone in that last sentence. >> >> JC >> >> Le 15 avr. 2014 à 15:02, michael gurstein a écrit :ung >> >> Congrats Nnenna, >> >> Since you are asking for suggestions for points to cover I would suggest >> the following: >> 1. A formal commitment/re-commitment to the Internet for the >> Common Good/in the Public Interest… I only see minor and off-handed >> references to this in the NetMundial statement but there needs to be a >> full-on commitment/re-commitment to this. This is especially the case >> given the risks of fragmentation/privatization of interests a “stakeholder” >> approach to Internet governance presents. >> 2. Framing/reframing “multistakeholderism” as a useful element in >> policy consultation and development, with suitable measures being in place >> to ensure the probity and accountability of these processes, within the >> context of democratic decision making. I like the phrase “multistakeholder >> dialogue in a democratic framework”. >> 3. Linking Internet Governance with social (and economic) >> justice. The Internet is becoming a dominant means for economic activity >> and wealth distribution/redistribution. Internet Governance, which in the >> NetMundial document is extended to include the “Right to Development” needs >> also to address social justice issues which are rapidly becoming the >> dominant issues of our time. >> 4. Finding the means to allow the widest range of voices into the >> Internet Governance dialogue. What this means is going beyond simple >> “capacity building” which ultimately can only enable the few, into >> designing processes and mechanisms which allow for the many to have a >> useful understanding of the broader issues and mechanisms to give voice and >> have those voices heard. >> Good luck with it. >> >> Mike >> >> *From:* bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto: >> bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] *On Behalf Of *Nnenna Nwakanma >> *Sent:* Monday, April 14, 2014 11:36 PM >> *To:* Governance; bestbits at lists.bestbits.netso >> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >> major issues >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, inviting me >> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack one >> of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >> >> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >> >> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas into >> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major issues >> will be overlooked. >> >> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >> >> Hope we can pull this off well. >> All for now >> >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > > -- > Dr. Anja Kovacs > The Internet Democracy Project > > +91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs > www.internetdemocracy.in > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 15 16:21:28 2014 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 22:21:28 +0200 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Bravo Nnenna, an honour for you, Africa, and the CS. some bits - linguistic diversity - translation in workshop sessions - funding for LDC delegates in international events - protection of traditional knowledge - affordable medicine - free educational material . Louis -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Apr 15 16:25:23 2014 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 06:25:23 +1000 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6DAA9AE69F1945B1848B429849D23801@Toshiba> and thank Edward Snowden for bringing us all together From: Louis Pouzin (well) Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:21 AM To: Nnenna Nwakanma Cc: Best Bits ; mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Bravo Nnenna, an honour for you, Africa, and the CS. some bits - linguistic diversity - translation in workshop sessions - funding for LDC delegates in international events - protection of traditional knowledge - affordable medicine - free educational material . Louis -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From joana at varonferraz.com Wed Apr 16 01:45:05 2014 From: joana at varonferraz.com (Joana Varon) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 02:45:05 -0300 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <6DAA9AE69F1945B1848B429849D23801@Toshiba> References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> <6DAA9AE69F1945B1848B429849D23801@Toshiba> Message-ID: Ian has just read my mind: Nnenna, please, thank Mr Snowden, for slightly changing the geopolitics! Also, it seams you will be sharing the stage with our president Dilma! +1 to anriette's and Anja's points + my potpourri from the topics that kept coming in this thread with some additions: - Surveillance and the right to privacy - digital divide is still an issue - net neutrality shall be reinforced - IANA transition shall not overcome the debate, but transparency and inclusiveness in this process, beyond ICANN community shall be enforced - multistakeholderism is not enough, we need a bottom up democratic participation, which enables balance to the lack of power and influence within stakeholder groups. But also checks and balances, transparency, accountability and eventually sanctions - we need to increase meaningful participation from people in developing parts of the world (I guess at the end we are all very privileged to be able to engage and understand this debate, as well as responsible for the outcome) - need for capacity building and there was a lot of reference to trust trust trust.. So, I guess, the web we want, is the web we trust. ;) On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > and thank Edward Snowden for bringing us all together > > *From:* Louis Pouzin (well) > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:21 AM > *To:* Nnenna Nwakanma > *Cc:* Best Bits ; > mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* Re: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at > Netmundial - Civil Society major issues > > Bravo Nnenna, an honour for you, Africa, and the CS. > > some bits > - linguistic diversity > - translation in workshop sessions > - funding for LDC delegates in international events > - protection of traditional knowledge > - affordable medicine > - free educational material > . > Louis > > ------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- -- Joana Varon Ferraz @joana_varon PGP 0x016B8E73 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From joana at varonferraz.com Wed Apr 16 01:48:19 2014 From: joana at varonferraz.com (Joana Varon) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 02:48:19 -0300 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> <6DAA9AE69F1945B1848B429849D23801@Toshiba> Message-ID: would also mention the need to come up with some sort of coordination mechanism for addressing the gaps on IG policies... rock it! On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 2:45 AM, Joana Varon wrote: > Ian has just read my mind: Nnenna, please, thank Mr Snowden, for slightly > changing the geopolitics! > > Also, it seams you will be sharing the stage with our president Dilma! > +1 to anriette's and Anja's points + my potpourri from the topics that > kept coming in this thread with some additions: > > - Surveillance and the right to privacy > > - digital divide is still an issue > > - net neutrality shall be reinforced > > - IANA transition shall not overcome the debate, but transparency and > inclusiveness in this process, beyond ICANN community shall be enforced > > - multistakeholderism is not enough, we need a bottom up democratic > participation, which enables balance to the lack of power and influence > within stakeholder groups. But also checks and balances, transparency, > accountability and eventually sanctions > > - we need to increase meaningful participation from people in developing > parts of the world (I guess at the end we are all very privileged to be > able to engage and understand this debate, as well as responsible for the > outcome) > > - need for capacity building > > and there was a lot of reference to trust trust trust.. So, I guess, the > web we want, is the web we trust. > > ;) > > > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> and thank Edward Snowden for bringing us all together >> >> *From:* Louis Pouzin (well) >> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:21 AM >> *To:* Nnenna Nwakanma >> *Cc:* Best Bits ; >> mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> *Subject:* Re: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at >> Netmundial - Civil Society major issues >> >> Bravo Nnenna, an honour for you, Africa, and the CS. >> >> some bits >> - linguistic diversity >> - translation in workshop sessions >> - funding for LDC delegates in international events >> - protection of traditional knowledge >> - affordable medicine >> - free educational material >> . >> Louis >> >> ------------------------------ >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > > -- > -- > > Joana Varon Ferraz > @joana_varon > PGP 0x016B8E73 > > > -- -- Joana Varon Ferraz @joana_varon PGP 0x016B8E73 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Wed Apr 16 04:25:30 2014 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 18:25:30 +1000 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> <6DAA9AE69F1945B1848B429849D23801@Toshiba> Message-ID: <135BE807247043E291087169A6BF8F24@Toshiba> I like Anne’s suggestion. I definitely think that a percentage of ICANN revenue (aka taxes) should be set aside for such purposes. As regards common good/ public utility; I am very interested to see what others think. I am reminded of the Macbride description of mass media as “a tool for the development of humankind”, and also of the various arguments (Bob Franklin and others) that we should treat Internet as we do footpaths, roads, etc – available to all to use and not restricted on the grounds of affordability. As yet, I dont think the internet is a common good or a public utility. Perhaps it should be; an interesting question is what will need to happen before it is a common good or a public utility. Ian Peter From: Anne Jellema Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 5:56 PM To: Joana Varon Cc: Ian Peter ; Louis Pouzin (well) ; Nnenna Nwakanma ; Best Bits ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Hi all Resource issues have been mentioned several times in proposals for Nnenna's speech: - Access issues, closing the digital divide(s) - Resources needed for civil society to play its part in IG processes on a more equal footing with other 'stakeholders' - Resources needed for the IGF to function well I strongly agree that these issues need to be raised. I think we will be most effective if we also put forward proposals for acting on them. I wonder if we want to suggest that a portion of domain name revenue should be set aside in a public benefit fund to help close the above resource gaps. Clearly the design and governance of such a fund would be incredibly hard to get right. But at this stage, it's a matter of pushing for a broad principle: i.e. that a part of the hundreds of millions raised every year in domain name fees (ICANN alone will earn $200m in 2014, according to their 2014 budget statement) should be reinvested in public benefit efforts that would contribute to achieving the admirable rights and principles listed in the outcome document. Additionally, in tackling the first point (access/digital divide), is there broad consensus among us that the internet should be considered a common good and/or a public utility? Best Anne On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Joana Varon wrote: Ian has just read my mind: Nnenna, please, thank Mr Snowden, for slightly changing the geopolitics! Also, it seams you will be sharing the stage with our president Dilma! +1 to anriette's and Anja's points + my potpourri from the topics that kept coming in this thread with some additions: - Surveillance and the right to privacy - digital divide is still an issue - net neutrality shall be reinforced - IANA transition shall not overcome the debate, but transparency and inclusiveness in this process, beyond ICANN community shall be enforced - multistakeholderism is not enough, we need a bottom up democratic participation, which enables balance to the lack of power and influence within stakeholder groups. But also checks and balances, transparency, accountability and eventually sanctions - we need to increase meaningful participation from people in developing parts of the world (I guess at the end we are all very privileged to be able to engage and understand this debate, as well as responsible for the outcome) - need for capacity building and there was a lot of reference to trust trust trust.. So, I guess, the web we want, is the web we trust. ;) On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Ian Peter wrote: and thank Edward Snowden for bringing us all together From: Louis Pouzin (well) Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:21 AM To: Nnenna Nwakanma Cc: Best Bits ; mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues Bravo Nnenna, an honour for you, Africa, and the CS. some bits - linguistic diversity - translation in workshop sessions - funding for LDC delegates in international events - protection of traditional knowledge - affordable medicine - free educational material . Louis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- -- Joana Varon Ferraz @joana_varon PGP 0x016B8E73 ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- Anne Jellema CEO +27 061 36 9352 (ZA) +1 202 684 6885 (US) @afjellema World Wide Web Foundation | 1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington DC, 20005, USA | www.webfoundation.org | Twitter: @webfoundation -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 16 06:08:46 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:38:46 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> And yes, I forgot to mention, 'public' has disappeared from 'open and public standards' which was in the initial draft...... I think we need to be discussing the draft netmundial outcome document that has been put for public comments.. Can people tell me one good thing about the document... I have not heard anyone present it. This was the event that we invested so much in, looked so much forward to... Why we have not anything to say about the outcome document. parminder On Tuesday 15 April 2014 06:24 PM, parminder wrote: > Carlos, > > Of course you know what net neutrality is - it is there in the Marco > Civil; it is not here in this document... > > And even the half cock term 'neutrality' has been specifically > removed, by those opposed to net neutrality, and you are trying to > convince us that net neutrality is still there... > > Not only net neutrality has been removed, 'free flow of information' > which figured twice in the earlier (leaked) draft has been removed > from both places.. > > Plus the mention of 'necessary and proportionate' principle (s) has > been removed.. > > Plus need for agreements on restraining cyber weapons have been removed... > > The part on access for disabled has been weakened... > > The recognition in the previous document of need for mechanisms to > address emerging issues and those which do not have a existing home > has been greatly diluted... > > So, the big business has done a thorough vetting of the doc to make > sure that not a wisp of anything that could even potentially interfere > with their free reign on the global Internet could pass through... > > And what happened to other suggestions form HLC members who are to big > business or the US gov... > > Argentinian government and Indian government (and in a way also the > European Commission) had asked for the insertion of the term > 'democratic' in different places where the characteristics of Internet > governance were listed.... But, no, that demand was not accepted... > > There is no place for democracy and democratic in the land of > multistakeholderism, fronting or big business interests, as the > changes in the document clearly show. > > BTW, India in its comments on the document (as per the leaked > documents) seem to have also asked for a recognition of the Internet > as a global commons... but of course no... what are you talking about! > > What are you asking the people of the world to do with this > document... To endorse it and celebrate it just becuase in about 500 > places it says multi-stakeholder.... > > parminder > > > On Tuesday 15 April 2014 05:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >> Carol, it was not "taken out" of the document. It is there, in detail, >> please re-read. >> >> --c.a. >> >> On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Carolina wrote: >>> Pls, mention net neutrality which was taken out of the document put out >>> for comments yesterday. More later. Should we consolidate all in a pad >>> to help Nnenna? >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Apr 15, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Marianne Franklin >> > wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all >>>> >>>> +1 from me re. Nnenna's role, and +1 from me re. Anriette's points below. >>>> >>>> best >>>> MF >>>> >>>> On 15/04/2014 19:44, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >>>>> Congrats Nnenna! >>>>> >>>>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that >>>>> working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, >>>>> particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society >>>>> - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit >>>>> :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and >>>>> procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, >>>>> because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of >>>>> principles that defines what the public interest is in internet >>>>> governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>>>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this >>>>> framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>>>> >>>>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only >>>>> - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, >>>>> and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for >>>>> multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to >>>>> get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only >>>>> issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it >>>>> is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that >>>>> are not simply cosmetic. >>>>> >>>>> Anriette >>>>> >>>>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>>>>> + 1 >>>>>> jeanette >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>>>>>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>>>>>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>>>>>> *To:* Governance ; >>>>>>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>>>>>> major issues >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, >>>>>>> inviting me >>>>>>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>>>>>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>>>>>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas >>>>>>> into >>>>>>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major >>>>>>> issues >>>>>>> will be overlooked. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>>>>>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All for now >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nnenna >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>> -- >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> anriette esterhuysenanriette 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 >>>> -- >>>> Dr Marianne Franklin >>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics >>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program >>>> Goldsmiths (University of London) >>>> Department of Media & Communications >>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW >>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 >>>> >>>> @GloComm >>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm >>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ >>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ >>>> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) >>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org >>>> @netrights >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Wed Apr 16 07:13:42 2014 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 11:13:42 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] multistakeholderism is democracy was Re: [] FW: US Is an O... In-Reply-To: References: <1DEB7534D981B444BF234789326B22A8AF08BDFC51@MBX.INTERNEWS.LOCAL> <079f01cf5898$762b5ba0$628212e0$@gmail.com> <534D3E2C.6020609@acm.org> <534D4240.3040209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi, On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 2:09 PM, parminder wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 April 2014 07:07 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > > > SNIP > > > . So democracy as a concept cannot be frozen into the practice of voting > as we know it today (one person, one vote) in the sole context of > nation-sates. > > > It may not be frozen into the practice of voting-- there is a huge amount > of literature and practice of participatory democracy that says exactly > that.. But, can we freeze in not having a vote for corporates - in fact > multiple and exclusive votes, where ordinary people do not have votes... > That is MS decision making... > By that sentence plus the phrase that says MSism may be more, or less, democratic --as indeed the gist of a good chunk of my message-- I was in fact addressing the party that reacts against any reference to democracy in the Ig context (as seems to be the case with Milton reacting to EC's Neelie Kroes' blog post on the NETmundial outcome draft document.) So don't get me wrong: I am not satisfied with everything about MSism although I remain open to the fact that some implementation(s) of it may work well in some setting(s). And as I have suggested, I can't even effectively compare Democracy and Multi-stakeholderism because, as I said, it seems to me we're conflating different levels of analysis (it's even worse when one thinks Democracy is something that is necessarily confined within nation-state boundaries for government affairs.) Furthermore, the simple word "democracy" (the rule of the people) tells me a good deal about the intent, goal and set of values being in play, while the simple word "multistakeholderism" only tells me that multiple stakeholders are involved. It doesn't even say "multi-stakeholder-cracy" and it's much easier for so many people around the world to understand the notion of "the people" than it is for us here to even agree on what constitutes "stakeholder" (let alone for people at large to understand what it is.) And for those who think they can effectively compare MSism with Democracy (putting them on the same plane of analysis), I would like someone to tell me (indeed demonstrate) how you're going to use MSism to elect the US President and members of Congress -- in a way that will convince American people that this will better serve their interests as opposed to what they have right now. Further on that line of reflection, one might wonder what are those state Republicans (still in the US) intent on vote suppression or making it harder to some people to vote at elections up to? And what about all the gerrymandering of the districts? Are they being less democratic in a democracy, or more democratic? Are they having their own version of MSism? (I'm asking this not to be provocative but because it was my impression that some people see any reference to voting, equated with Democracy, as something counter to MSism.) And if they're just messing around for pure political/election gains (IOW, making "rational choices") what would be the (principled?) response of Democracy to that and what would be MSism's? [Again, the boundaries for the questions in the above 2 paragraphs to make sense, in my view, are delineated by the thinking that assumes both models are comparable in such a way that one can be said to be better than and to supersede the other.] > > > Why do we need to go beyond participatory democracy as the means of > fulfilling the ideal of democracy and rather jump to MSism which is simply > not democratic in a thousand way..... > On the other hand, could you please elaborate on how you would concretely apply participatory democracy to decision-making about the Internet and all what we're referring to as its governance? Sorry if you've done this elsewhere and I haven't read it. Otherwise, my sense is that all your criticism is being construed as advocacy for intergovernmental mode of governance, notably though traditional treaty-making. I don't have answers to all the questions. I still have a lot of thinking to do and a lot to learn. But those are the things I can say so far regarding the question of MSism and Democracy. Democracy is much older and has delivered many goods, and I don't think anybody can say (nor do I think anybody is saying) it's time to throw that away. MSism is much younger (in its infancy) and still needs to prove itself in the eyes of countless number of people. However, I don't think one can replace the other because I see them conceptually and to some extent operationally at different levels. That's why I can conceive of a MSism instance that is less democratic, even anti-democratic, as well as I can conceive of one that is more democratic or maybe even enhancing Democracy in an already existing form. It will all depend on the specifics on the implementation at hand: the setting, what is in a "stakeholder" and how do they impact the decision-making process, to mention the most obvious ones. On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > On 15-Apr-14 09:37, Mawaki Chango wrote: > > MSism is a decision-making process and I don't know where anyone could > > have possibly taken that bogus idea that MSism is the next big thing > > after democracy (just like democracy once was that next big thing after > > tyranny, aristocracy, etc.) > > I am one who does argues that Multistakeholderism is not just another > decision making process. > > I also do not claim in is the next big thing after democracy. I argue > that it is a form of democracy. I cannot fundamentally disagree with that but I might say it differently: Multistakeholderism may be a form of exercise of democracy. For it to be effectively so, we would need (as I mention above) consensus on who are the stakeholders (or even what is a stakeholder) and how do they impact decisions, etc. Are all the conditions in place for everyone to have equal chance to participate and influence the outcome, if they're so inclined? It is those details that will make MSism a form of Democracy or not. > . > > I do agree that there is not just one form of the multistakeholder > model, but argue that there are attributes of Multistakeholderism as > participatory democracy that are necessary. > Do you think we could initiate collaborative work with the aim to put together a table which will include those attributes as well as the points of criticism? > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:29 AM, parminder wrote: > >> >> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 07:41 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >>> >>> On 15-Apr-14 09:37, Mawaki Chango wrote: >>> >>>> MSism is a decision-making process and I don't know where anyone could >>>> have possibly taken that bogus idea that MSism is the next big thing >>>> after democracy (just like democracy once was that next big thing after >>>> tyranny, aristocracy, etc.) >>>> >>> >> You had in your email sought focussing on actual practices... Therefore >> you need to look at practices of MSism... It is indeed the next thing after >> democracy, and NOT democracy... MSism gives big business a veto on public >> policy making. This kind of thing is impossible to even mention in a >> democratic discourse.. But the same unmentionable has been dressed by >> employment of huge expenditure of resources in the respectable clothes if >> MSism. >> >> Do you disagree that MSism as being practiced in its 'equal footing' >> model (1) gives veto power to big business and (2) such a thing is >> unattainable in democratic discourse and practice.. >> > I agree with (2). I haven't seen a formal veto power accorded to any stakeholder group but in some instances there is de facto something bordering a veto. Based on my experience with the GNSO Council at ICANN, particularly with the WHOIS policy debate. It seemed that business would push for yet another task force, and yet another working group, etc. until they get what they wanted (and the system allowed for that kind of manoeuvre.) The issue was so contentious we had to take a vote and their party lost. Their refusal to take a No for an answer led the Chair to accept, at the Marrakesh meeting (2006? or 07) the request that those who voted for the definition of Whois that won the vote to explain their... vote. I'm sure he meant it to be a kind of pedagogical engagement with the public at large. But think about that: you have to publicly declare your vote and explain it on the request of people who reject the result (and only those who voted for that result were asked to do that, obviously because of what they voted for.) I objected and declined. It made me feel like I was a character in a novel by Milan Kundera in which the setting is the old (pre-Vaclav Havel) Czechoslovakia -- The Joke (La Plaisanterie). That was my closest encounter with MSism ;) but it has been years now and I want to believe things didn't stay that way (so I don't mean the above as a wholesale characterization.) Or at least we can contribute to shaping them in a better direction (though I must say the way you describe what has been happening to the NETmundial draft document is alarming.) Mawaki > >> Now you may say that I am speaking about entirely imaginary models of >> MSism, and creatign strawmen of MSism... >> >> Well, no.. >> >> On the BestBit list an elaborate model has been developed and presented, >> latest in response to the leaked NetMundial draft (did you also support >> this model?) which creates a multistakeholder screening mechanism for >> taking up any public policy issue.. Does this not give big business a veto >> on what matters can be taken for public policy treatment? Is this >> democratic? >> >> Second, the NetMundial draft document seeks public policy making through >> consensus basis alone - which is an multistakeholder consensus on equal >> footing... It says that processes of governance have to be first be agreed >> by all stakeholders (keep reading business when I say stakeholders bec it >> is they for whom these models are fashioned).... >> >> Now, is it democratic to give business (big business, no one asked my >> corner shop guy) such structural vetos over public policy making? What >> could be more democratic... >> >> Since you said devil is in the details, lets talk about the detail and >> the devil... Lets talk specifics, and these above are the specifics of >> MSism... >> >> 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 sandra.hoferichter at freenet.de Wed Apr 16 10:07:17 2014 From: sandra.hoferichter at freenet.de (sandra hoferichter) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 16:07:17 +0200 Subject: [governance] EuroDIG - The European IGF taking place in Berlin on 12-13 June 2014 Message-ID: <00aa01cf597d$2d71f1e0$8855d5a0$@hoferichter@freenet.de> Registration for the European multi-stakeholder dialogue on Internet governance - Now possible! On 12 and 13 June 2014, this year's EuroDIG - the European Dialogue on Internet Governance - will be taking place in the Federal Foreign Office in Berlin, under the patronage of the German Federal Ministry of Economics. Registrations are now possible at www.eurodig.org, until 6 June 2014. It pays to be quick - the number of participants for EuroDIG this year is limited to 800. The Association of the German Internet industry, eco, is the host of EuroDIG this year. The European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG) is one of the most important Internet events at the European level, where stakeholders from industry, governments, academia and the civil society can exchange ideas on the future shaping of the Internet. In Berlin, the 2014 event is running under the slogan of: "Digital society at stake - Europe and the future of the Internet". New this year is the possibility for the general public to be involved in the evolvement of the program using a specially established wiki. On the EuroDIG wiki, anyone can contribute to it by drawing up or bringing topic clusters into focus, or by becoming involved in one of the organizing teams. The results of EuroDIG will influence, among other things, the international Internet Governance Forum, which will take place in Istanbul from 2 to 5 September 2014 _______________________________________________________________ Logo_EuroDIG_email European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG) office at eurodig.org www.eurodig.org Fon: +49.341.301 28 27 Mobile: +49.163.380 87 85 This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intendet recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6587 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 anriette at apc.org Wed Apr 16 11:25:38 2014 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 17:25:38 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> Agree with Parminder. We need to comment on these omissions. Is best strategy for us to just all comment as individuals, or organisations, or to also try and do collaborative submissions? But I would not blame big business Parminder. Texts coming out of intergovernmental processes like the WSIS +10 are also problematic from a public-interest perspective. Anriette On 16/04/2014 12:08, parminder wrote: > > And yes, I forgot to mention, 'public' has disappeared from 'open and > public standards' which was in the initial draft...... > > I think we need to be discussing the draft netmundial outcome document > that has been put for public comments.. > > Can people tell me one good thing about the document... I have not > heard anyone present it. > > This was the event that we invested so much in, looked so much forward > to... Why we have not anything to say about the outcome document. > > parminder > > > On Tuesday 15 April 2014 06:24 PM, parminder wrote: >> Carlos, >> >> Of course you know what net neutrality is - it is there in the Marco >> Civil; it is not here in this document... >> >> And even the half cock term 'neutrality' has been specifically >> removed, by those opposed to net neutrality, and you are trying to >> convince us that net neutrality is still there... >> >> Not only net neutrality has been removed, 'free flow of information' >> which figured twice in the earlier (leaked) draft has been removed >> from both places.. >> >> Plus the mention of 'necessary and proportionate' principle (s) has >> been removed.. >> >> Plus need for agreements on restraining cyber weapons have been >> removed... >> >> The part on access for disabled has been weakened... >> >> The recognition in the previous document of need for mechanisms to >> address emerging issues and those which do not have a existing home >> has been greatly diluted... >> >> So, the big business has done a thorough vetting of the doc to make >> sure that not a wisp of anything that could even potentially >> interfere with their free reign on the global Internet could pass >> through... >> >> And what happened to other suggestions form HLC members who are to >> big business or the US gov... >> >> Argentinian government and Indian government (and in a way also the >> European Commission) had asked for the insertion of the term >> 'democratic' in different places where the characteristics of >> Internet governance were listed.... But, no, that demand was not >> accepted... >> >> There is no place for democracy and democratic in the land of >> multistakeholderism, fronting or big business interests, as the >> changes in the document clearly show. >> >> BTW, India in its comments on the document (as per the leaked >> documents) seem to have also asked for a recognition of the Internet >> as a global commons... but of course no... what are you talking about! >> >> What are you asking the people of the world to do with this >> document... To endorse it and celebrate it just becuase in about 500 >> places it says multi-stakeholder.... >> >> parminder >> >> >> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 05:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>> Carol, it was not "taken out" of the document. It is there, in detail, >>> please re-read. >>> >>> --c.a. >>> >>> On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Carolina wrote: >>>> Pls, mention net neutrality which was taken out of the document put out >>>> for comments yesterday. More later. Should we consolidate all in a pad >>>> to help Nnenna? >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>> On Apr 15, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Marianne Franklin >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all >>>>> >>>>> +1 from me re. Nnenna's role, and +1 from me re. Anriette's points below. >>>>> >>>>> best >>>>> MF >>>>> >>>>> On 15/04/2014 19:44, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >>>>>> Congrats Nnenna! >>>>>> >>>>>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that >>>>>> working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, >>>>>> particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society >>>>>> - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit >>>>>> :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and >>>>>> procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, >>>>>> because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of >>>>>> principles that defines what the public interest is in internet >>>>>> governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>>>>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this >>>>>> framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>>>>> >>>>>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only >>>>>> - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, >>>>>> and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for >>>>>> multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to >>>>>> get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only >>>>>> issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it >>>>>> is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that >>>>>> are not simply cosmetic. >>>>>> >>>>>> Anriette >>>>>> >>>>>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>>>>>> + 1 >>>>>>> jeanette >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>>>>>>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>>>>>>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>>>>>>> *To:* Governance ; >>>>>>>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>>>>>>> major issues >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, >>>>>>>> inviting me >>>>>>>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>>>>>>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>>>>>>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas >>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major >>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>> will be overlooked. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>>>>>>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> All for now >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nnenna >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>> -- >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> 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 >>>>> -- >>>>> Dr Marianne Franklin >>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics >>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program >>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London) >>>>> Department of Media & Communications >>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW >>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 >>>>> >>>>> @GloComm >>>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm >>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ >>>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ >>>>> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) >>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org >>>>> @netrights >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > -- ------------------------------------------------------ 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 16 11:37:00 2014 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 11:37:00 -0400 Subject: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <00c701cf58aa$e83c3c20$b8b4b460$@gmail.com> <6DAA9AE69F1945B1848B429849D23801@Toshiba> Message-ID: Dear Joana, What a great slogan! I'd suggest one small addition - The web we want is the web we *can* trust Deirdre On 16 April 2014 01:45, Joana Varon wrote: > Ian has just read my mind: Nnenna, please, thank Mr Snowden, for slightly > changing the geopolitics! > > Also, it seams you will be sharing the stage with our president Dilma! > +1 to anriette's and Anja's points + my potpourri from the topics that > kept coming in this thread with some additions: > > - Surveillance and the right to privacy > > - digital divide is still an issue > > - net neutrality shall be reinforced > > - IANA transition shall not overcome the debate, but transparency and > inclusiveness in this process, beyond ICANN community shall be enforced > > - multistakeholderism is not enough, we need a bottom up democratic > participation, which enables balance to the lack of power and influence > within stakeholder groups. But also checks and balances, transparency, > accountability and eventually sanctions > > - we need to increase meaningful participation from people in developing > parts of the world (I guess at the end we are all very privileged to be > able to engage and understand this debate, as well as responsible for the > outcome) > > - need for capacity building > > and there was a lot of reference to trust trust trust.. So, I guess, the > web we want, is the web we trust. > > ;) > > > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> and thank Edward Snowden for bringing us all together >> >> *From:* Louis Pouzin (well) >> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:21 AM >> *To:* Nnenna Nwakanma >> *Cc:* Best Bits ; >> mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> *Subject:* Re: [governance] RE: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at >> Netmundial - Civil Society major issues >> >> Bravo Nnenna, an honour for you, Africa, and the CS. >> >> some bits >> - linguistic diversity >> - translation in workshop sessions >> - funding for LDC delegates in international events >> - protection of traditional knowledge >> - affordable medicine >> - free educational material >> . >> Louis >> >> ------------------------------ >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > > -- > -- > > 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 > > -- “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 ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Apr 16 11:46:31 2014 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 00:46:31 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> Message-ID: what is the value of "public" in "based on open public standards"? Does the word public add clarity? Does it tell us something otherwise missing? Drafts are there for comment and revision, one thing comments on the leaked document made quite clear is the need to shorten the final document (and usually the same group that said the document is too long then added more words of their own...) The relevant paragraph as it stands in the document for comment is: Internet governance should promote open standards, informed by individual and collective expertise and practical experience and decisions made by open consensus, that allow for a unique, interoperable, resilient, stable, decentralized, secure, and interconnected network, available to all. Standards must be consistent with human rights and allow development and innovation. (25, in http://document.netmundial.br/1-internet-governance-principles/) Is this weak? How can it be improved? 6 comments so far, are they helpful? Adam (in my individual capacity) On Apr 17, 2014, at 12:25 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Agree with Parminder. > > We need to comment on these omissions. Is best strategy for us to just all comment as individuals, or organisations, or to also try and do collaborative submissions? > > But I would not blame big business Parminder. > > Texts coming out of intergovernmental processes like the WSIS +10 are also problematic from a public-interest perspective. > > Anriette > > > On 16/04/2014 12:08, parminder wrote: >> >> And yes, I forgot to mention, 'public' has disappeared from 'open and public standards' which was in the initial draft...... >> >> I think we need to be discussing the draft netmundial outcome document that has been put for public comments.. >> >> Can people tell me one good thing about the document... I have not heard anyone present it. >> >> This was the event that we invested so much in, looked so much forward to... Why we have not anything to say about the outcome document. >> >> parminder >> >> >> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 06:24 PM, parminder wrote: >>> Carlos, >>> >>> Of course you know what net neutrality is - it is there in the Marco Civil; it is not here in this document... >>> >>> And even the half cock term 'neutrality' has been specifically removed, by those opposed to net neutrality, and you are trying to convince us that net neutrality is still there... >>> >>> Not only net neutrality has been removed, 'free flow of information' which figured twice in the earlier (leaked) draft has been removed from both places.. >>> >>> Plus the mention of 'necessary and proportionate' principle (s) has been removed.. >>> >>> Plus need for agreements on restraining cyber weapons have been removed... >>> >>> The part on access for disabled has been weakened... >>> >>> The recognition in the previous document of need for mechanisms to address emerging issues and those which do not have a existing home has been greatly diluted... >>> >>> So, the big business has done a thorough vetting of the doc to make sure that not a wisp of anything that could even potentially interfere with their free reign on the global Internet could pass through... >>> >>> And what happened to other suggestions form HLC members who are to big business or the US gov... >>> >>> Argentinian government and Indian government (and in a way also the European Commission) had asked for the insertion of the term 'democratic' in different places where the characteristics of Internet governance were listed.... But, no, that demand was not accepted... >>> >>> There is no place for democracy and democratic in the land of multistakeholderism, fronting or big business interests, as the changes in the document clearly show. >>> >>> BTW, India in its comments on the document (as per the leaked documents) seem to have also asked for a recognition of the Internet as a global commons... but of course no... what are you talking about! >>> >>> What are you asking the people of the world to do with this document... To endorse it and celebrate it just becuase in about 500 places it says multi-stakeholder.... >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 05:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>>> Carol, it was not "taken out" of the document. It is there, in detail, >>>> please re-read. >>>> >>>> --c.a. >>>> >>>> On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Carolina wrote: >>>> >>>>> Pls, mention net neutrality which was taken out of the document put out >>>>> for comments yesterday. More later. Should we consolidate all in a pad >>>>> to help Nnenna? >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 15, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Marianne Franklin < >>>>> m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk >>>>> >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 from me re. Nnenna's role, and +1 from me re. Anriette's points below. >>>>>> >>>>>> best >>>>>> MF >>>>>> >>>>>> On 15/04/2014 19:44, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Congrats Nnenna! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that >>>>>>> working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, >>>>>>> particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society >>>>>>> - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit >>>>>>> :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and >>>>>>> procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, >>>>>>> because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of >>>>>>> principles that defines what the public interest is in internet >>>>>>> governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>>>>>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this >>>>>>> framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only >>>>>>> - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, >>>>>>> and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for >>>>>>> multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to >>>>>>> get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only >>>>>>> issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it >>>>>>> is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that >>>>>>> are not simply cosmetic. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anriette >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> + 1 >>>>>>>> jeanette >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>>>>>>>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>>>>>>>> *To:* Governance >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>>>>>>>> major issues >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, >>>>>>>>> inviting me >>>>>>>>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>>>>>>>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>>>>>>>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas >>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major >>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>> will be overlooked. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>>>>>>>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> All for now >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nnenna >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Dr Marianne Franklin >>>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics >>>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program >>>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London) >>>>>> Department of Media & Communications >>>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW >>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> @GloComm >>>>>> >>>>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm >>>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ >>>>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) >>>>>> >>>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org >>>>>> >>>>>> @netrights >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>> . >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >> > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 16 12:02:10 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 21:32:10 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> Message-ID: <534EA982.1020109@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 08:55 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Agree with Parminder. > > We need to comment on these omissions. Is best strategy for us to just > all comment as individuals, or organisations, or to also try and do > collaborative submissions? Anriette I am happy to join any credible strategy others come up with. Right now ITfC and partners are thinking about our response. > > But I would not blame big business Parminder. > > Texts coming out of intergovernmental processes like the WSIS +10 are > also problematic from a public-interest perspective. > In case of such inter-gov processes, civil society openly names and criticizes those who are responsible for non-inclusion or exclusion of public -interest text. we never shy away from it... Whether it is Saudi Arabia and China, or the US or EU - I have seen this everywhere, in WIPO discussions on access to knowledge for the disabled, in human right resolutions, in WTO negotiations on food grain subsidies, in climate talks about concrete targets and so on.. Civil society uses naming and shaming as a regular tactic. Why should we be shy to name 'bad actors' in the present case, What is the basis of cultivating any special relationship with big business based on non-criticism or anything. Here, most exclusions, net neutrality, pulbicness of standards, free flow of information (as per my understanding), weakening of provision on access for disabled, not accepting HLM members suggestion to include 'democratic' have happened on big business' behest, largely, although there are other key omissions caused by the one country most opposed to global measures against surveillance and cyber weapon control.. So, I dont understand why should I not blame big business when they re to be blamed? I find no reason. Well, I know they can play a big role in top civil society selections - like they did with the CS co chair of NetMundial - but thanks, I am not interested. parminder > Anriette > > > On 16/04/2014 12:08, parminder wrote: >> >> And yes, I forgot to mention, 'public' has disappeared from 'open and >> public standards' which was in the initial draft...... >> >> I think we need to be discussing the draft netmundial outcome >> document that has been put for public comments.. >> >> Can people tell me one good thing about the document... I have not >> heard anyone present it. >> >> This was the event that we invested so much in, looked so much >> forward to... Why we have not anything to say about the outcome >> document. >> >> parminder >> >> >> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 06:24 PM, parminder wrote: >>> Carlos, >>> >>> Of course you know what net neutrality is - it is there in the Marco >>> Civil; it is not here in this document... >>> >>> And even the half cock term 'neutrality' has been specifically >>> removed, by those opposed to net neutrality, and you are trying to >>> convince us that net neutrality is still there... >>> >>> Not only net neutrality has been removed, 'free flow of information' >>> which figured twice in the earlier (leaked) draft has been removed >>> from both places.. >>> >>> Plus the mention of 'necessary and proportionate' principle (s) has >>> been removed.. >>> >>> Plus need for agreements on restraining cyber weapons have been >>> removed... >>> >>> The part on access for disabled has been weakened... >>> >>> The recognition in the previous document of need for mechanisms to >>> address emerging issues and those which do not have a existing home >>> has been greatly diluted... >>> >>> So, the big business has done a thorough vetting of the doc to make >>> sure that not a wisp of anything that could even potentially >>> interfere with their free reign on the global Internet could pass >>> through... >>> >>> And what happened to other suggestions form HLC members who are to >>> big business or the US gov... >>> >>> Argentinian government and Indian government (and in a way also the >>> European Commission) had asked for the insertion of the term >>> 'democratic' in different places where the characteristics of >>> Internet governance were listed.... But, no, that demand was not >>> accepted... >>> >>> There is no place for democracy and democratic in the land of >>> multistakeholderism, fronting or big business interests, as the >>> changes in the document clearly show. >>> >>> BTW, India in its comments on the document (as per the leaked >>> documents) seem to have also asked for a recognition of the Internet >>> as a global commons... but of course no... what are you talking about! >>> >>> What are you asking the people of the world to do with this >>> document... To endorse it and celebrate it just becuase in about 500 >>> places it says multi-stakeholder.... >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 05:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>>> Carol, it was not "taken out" of the document. It is there, in detail, >>>> please re-read. >>>> >>>> --c.a. >>>> >>>> On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Carolina wrote: >>>>> Pls, mention net neutrality which was taken out of the document put out >>>>> for comments yesterday. More later. Should we consolidate all in a pad >>>>> to help Nnenna? >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 15, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Marianne Franklin >>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 from me re. Nnenna's role, and +1 from me re. Anriette's points below. >>>>>> >>>>>> best >>>>>> MF >>>>>> >>>>>> On 15/04/2014 19:44, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >>>>>>> Congrats Nnenna! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that >>>>>>> working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, >>>>>>> particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society >>>>>>> - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit >>>>>>> :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and >>>>>>> procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, >>>>>>> because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of >>>>>>> principles that defines what the public interest is in internet >>>>>>> governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>>>>>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this >>>>>>> framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only >>>>>>> - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, >>>>>>> and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for >>>>>>> multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to >>>>>>> get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only >>>>>>> issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it >>>>>>> is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that >>>>>>> are not simply cosmetic. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anriette >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>>>>>>> + 1 >>>>>>>> jeanette >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>>>>>>>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>>>>>>>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>>>>>>>> *To:* Governance ; >>>>>>>>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>>>>>>>> major issues >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, >>>>>>>>> inviting me >>>>>>>>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>>>>>>>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>>>>>>>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas >>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major >>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>> will be overlooked. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>>>>>>>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> All for now >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nnenna >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> anriette esterhuysenanriette 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 >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Dr Marianne Franklin >>>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics >>>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program >>>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London) >>>>>> Department of Media & Communications >>>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW >>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 >>>>>> >>>>>> @GloComm >>>>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm >>>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ >>>>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ >>>>>> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) >>>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org >>>>>> @netrights >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >> > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > anriette esterhuysenanriette 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 16 12:07:46 2014 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:07:46 -0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> Message-ID: <534EAAD2.5040508@cafonso.ca> Dear Anri, "collaborative submissions" not inserted in the comments space will not work at this point. Use the comments, and please recall the deadline for them is April 21st. fraternal regards --c.a. On 04/16/2014 12:25 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Agree with Parminder. > > We need to comment on these omissions. Is best strategy for us to just > all comment as individuals, or organisations, or to also try and do > collaborative submissions? > > But I would not blame big business Parminder. > > Texts coming out of intergovernmental processes like the WSIS +10 are > also problematic from a public-interest perspective. > > Anriette > > > On 16/04/2014 12:08, parminder wrote: >> >> And yes, I forgot to mention, 'public' has disappeared from 'open and >> public standards' which was in the initial draft...... >> >> I think we need to be discussing the draft netmundial outcome document >> that has been put for public comments.. >> >> Can people tell me one good thing about the document... I have not >> heard anyone present it. >> >> This was the event that we invested so much in, looked so much forward >> to... Why we have not anything to say about the outcome document. >> >> parminder >> >> >> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 06:24 PM, parminder wrote: >>> Carlos, >>> >>> Of course you know what net neutrality is - it is there in the Marco >>> Civil; it is not here in this document... >>> >>> And even the half cock term 'neutrality' has been specifically >>> removed, by those opposed to net neutrality, and you are trying to >>> convince us that net neutrality is still there... >>> >>> Not only net neutrality has been removed, 'free flow of information' >>> which figured twice in the earlier (leaked) draft has been removed >>> from both places.. >>> >>> Plus the mention of 'necessary and proportionate' principle (s) has >>> been removed.. >>> >>> Plus need for agreements on restraining cyber weapons have been >>> removed... >>> >>> The part on access for disabled has been weakened... >>> >>> The recognition in the previous document of need for mechanisms to >>> address emerging issues and those which do not have a existing home >>> has been greatly diluted... >>> >>> So, the big business has done a thorough vetting of the doc to make >>> sure that not a wisp of anything that could even potentially >>> interfere with their free reign on the global Internet could pass >>> through... >>> >>> And what happened to other suggestions form HLC members who are to >>> big business or the US gov... >>> >>> Argentinian government and Indian government (and in a way also the >>> European Commission) had asked for the insertion of the term >>> 'democratic' in different places where the characteristics of >>> Internet governance were listed.... But, no, that demand was not >>> accepted... >>> >>> There is no place for democracy and democratic in the land of >>> multistakeholderism, fronting or big business interests, as the >>> changes in the document clearly show. >>> >>> BTW, India in its comments on the document (as per the leaked >>> documents) seem to have also asked for a recognition of the Internet >>> as a global commons... but of course no... what are you talking about! >>> >>> What are you asking the people of the world to do with this >>> document... To endorse it and celebrate it just becuase in about 500 >>> places it says multi-stakeholder.... >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 05:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>>> Carol, it was not "taken out" of the document. It is there, in detail, >>>> please re-read. >>>> >>>> --c.a. >>>> >>>> On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Carolina wrote: >>>>> Pls, mention net neutrality which was taken out of the document put out >>>>> for comments yesterday. More later. Should we consolidate all in a pad >>>>> to help Nnenna? >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 15, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Marianne Franklin >>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 from me re. Nnenna's role, and +1 from me re. Anriette's points below. >>>>>> >>>>>> best >>>>>> MF >>>>>> >>>>>> On 15/04/2014 19:44, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >>>>>>> Congrats Nnenna! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that >>>>>>> working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, >>>>>>> particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society >>>>>>> - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit >>>>>>> :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and >>>>>>> procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, >>>>>>> because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of >>>>>>> principles that defines what the public interest is in internet >>>>>>> governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>>>>>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this >>>>>>> framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only >>>>>>> - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, >>>>>>> and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for >>>>>>> multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to >>>>>>> get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only >>>>>>> issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it >>>>>>> is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that >>>>>>> are not simply cosmetic. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anriette >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>>>>>>> + 1 >>>>>>>> jeanette >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>>>>>>>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>>>>>>>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>>>>>>>> *To:* Governance ; >>>>>>>>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>>>>>>>> major issues >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, >>>>>>>>> inviting me >>>>>>>>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>>>>>>>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>>>>>>>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas >>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major >>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>> will be overlooked. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>>>>>>>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> All for now >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nnenna >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Dr Marianne Franklin >>>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics >>>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program >>>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London) >>>>>> Department of Media & Communications >>>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW >>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 >>>>>> >>>>>> @GloComm >>>>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm >>>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ >>>>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ >>>>>> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) >>>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org >>>>>> @netrights >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >> > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > 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 ca at cafonso.ca Wed Apr 16 12:10:44 2014 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:10:44 -0300 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> Message-ID: <534EAB84.9090309@cafonso.ca> Excellent, objective comments, Adam. --c.a. On 04/16/2014 12:46 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > what is the value of "public" in "based on open public standards"? Does the word public add clarity? Does it tell us something otherwise missing? > > Drafts are there for comment and revision, one thing comments on the leaked document made quite clear is the need to shorten the final document (and usually the same group that said the document is too long then added more words of their own...) > > The relevant paragraph as it stands in the document for comment is: > > Internet governance should promote open standards, informed by individual and collective expertise and practical experience and decisions made by open consensus, that allow for a unique, interoperable, resilient, stable, decentralized, secure, and interconnected network, available to all. Standards must be consistent with human rights and allow development and innovation. > > (25, in http://document.netmundial.br/1-internet-governance-principles/) > > Is this weak? How can it be improved? 6 comments so far, are they helpful? > > Adam (in my individual capacity) > > > On Apr 17, 2014, at 12:25 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > >> Agree with Parminder. >> >> We need to comment on these omissions. Is best strategy for us to just all comment as individuals, or organisations, or to also try and do collaborative submissions? >> >> But I would not blame big business Parminder. >> >> Texts coming out of intergovernmental processes like the WSIS +10 are also problematic from a public-interest perspective. >> >> Anriette >> >> >> On 16/04/2014 12:08, parminder wrote: >>> >>> And yes, I forgot to mention, 'public' has disappeared from 'open and public standards' which was in the initial draft...... >>> >>> I think we need to be discussing the draft netmundial outcome document that has been put for public comments.. >>> >>> Can people tell me one good thing about the document... I have not heard anyone present it. >>> >>> This was the event that we invested so much in, looked so much forward to... Why we have not anything to say about the outcome document. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 06:24 PM, parminder wrote: >>>> Carlos, >>>> >>>> Of course you know what net neutrality is - it is there in the Marco Civil; it is not here in this document... >>>> >>>> And even the half cock term 'neutrality' has been specifically removed, by those opposed to net neutrality, and you are trying to convince us that net neutrality is still there... >>>> >>>> Not only net neutrality has been removed, 'free flow of information' which figured twice in the earlier (leaked) draft has been removed from both places.. >>>> >>>> Plus the mention of 'necessary and proportionate' principle (s) has been removed.. >>>> >>>> Plus need for agreements on restraining cyber weapons have been removed... >>>> >>>> The part on access for disabled has been weakened... >>>> >>>> The recognition in the previous document of need for mechanisms to address emerging issues and those which do not have a existing home has been greatly diluted... >>>> >>>> So, the big business has done a thorough vetting of the doc to make sure that not a wisp of anything that could even potentially interfere with their free reign on the global Internet could pass through... >>>> >>>> And what happened to other suggestions form HLC members who are to big business or the US gov... >>>> >>>> Argentinian government and Indian government (and in a way also the European Commission) had asked for the insertion of the term 'democratic' in different places where the characteristics of Internet governance were listed.... But, no, that demand was not accepted... >>>> >>>> There is no place for democracy and democratic in the land of multistakeholderism, fronting or big business interests, as the changes in the document clearly show. >>>> >>>> BTW, India in its comments on the document (as per the leaked documents) seem to have also asked for a recognition of the Internet as a global commons... but of course no... what are you talking about! >>>> >>>> What are you asking the people of the world to do with this document... To endorse it and celebrate it just becuase in about 500 places it says multi-stakeholder.... >>>> >>>> parminder >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 05:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>>>> Carol, it was not "taken out" of the document. It is there, in detail, >>>>> please re-read. >>>>> >>>>> --c.a. >>>>> >>>>> On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Carolina wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Pls, mention net neutrality which was taken out of the document put out >>>>>> for comments yesterday. More later. Should we consolidate all in a pad >>>>>> to help Nnenna? >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>> On Apr 15, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Marianne Franklin < >>>>>> m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk >>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 from me re. Nnenna's role, and +1 from me re. Anriette's points below. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> best >>>>>>> MF >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 19:44, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Congrats Nnenna! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that >>>>>>>> working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, >>>>>>>> particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society >>>>>>>> - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit >>>>>>>> :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and >>>>>>>> procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, >>>>>>>> because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of >>>>>>>> principles that defines what the public interest is in internet >>>>>>>> governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>>>>>>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this >>>>>>>> framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only >>>>>>>> - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, >>>>>>>> and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for >>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to >>>>>>>> get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only >>>>>>>> issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it >>>>>>>> is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that >>>>>>>> are not simply cosmetic. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anriette >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> + 1 >>>>>>>>> jeanette >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>>>>>>>>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>>>>>>>>> *To:* Governance >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ; >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>>>>>>>>> major issues >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, >>>>>>>>>> inviting me >>>>>>>>>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>>>>>>>>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>>>>>>>>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas >>>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major >>>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>>> will be overlooked. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>>>>>>>>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> All for now >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Nnenna >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Dr Marianne Franklin >>>>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics >>>>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program >>>>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London) >>>>>>> Department of Media & Communications >>>>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW >>>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @GloComm >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm >>>>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ >>>>>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @netrights >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 16 12:10:21 2014 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 21:40:21 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> Message-ID: <534EAB6D.70901@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 09:16 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > what is the value of "public" in "based on open public standards"? Does the word public add clarity? Does it tell us something otherwise missing? If it had no value, trust me, it wont have been removed... But to answer your question, I quote principle 10 of the 'Delhi Declaration for a Just and Equitable Internet' (enclosed) "An open and decentralized Internet requires strict enforcement of open and public standards. Open standards allow fully interoperable implementation by anyone in any type of software, including Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). The trend towards privatisation of digital standards must be stemmed and measures must be introduced to ensure that standards are publicly owned, freely accessible and implementable. " I hope this answers your question.. I can of course elaborate further. No we did not write principle just to spite those who removed the 'public standard' part from the draft :). This principle was of course written much earlier. parminder > > Drafts are there for comment and revision, one thing comments on the leaked document made quite clear is the need to shorten the final document (and usually the same group that said the document is too long then added more words of their own...) > > The relevant paragraph as it stands in the document for comment is: > > Internet governance should promote open standards, informed by individual and collective expertise and practical experience and decisions made by open consensus, that allow for a unique, interoperable, resilient, stable, decentralized, secure, and interconnected network, available to all. Standards must be consistent with human rights and allow development and innovation. > > (25, in http://document.netmundial.br/1-internet-governance-principles/) > > Is this weak? How can it be improved? 6 comments so far, are they helpful? > > Adam (in my individual capacity) > > > On Apr 17, 2014, at 12:25 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > >> Agree with Parminder. >> >> We need to comment on these omissions. Is best strategy for us to just all comment as individuals, or organisations, or to also try and do collaborative submissions? >> >> But I would not blame big business Parminder. >> >> Texts coming out of intergovernmental processes like the WSIS +10 are also problematic from a public-interest perspective. >> >> Anriette >> >> >> On 16/04/2014 12:08, parminder wrote: >>> And yes, I forgot to mention, 'public' has disappeared from 'open and public standards' which was in the initial draft...... >>> >>> I think we need to be discussing the draft netmundial outcome document that has been put for public comments.. >>> >>> Can people tell me one good thing about the document... I have not heard anyone present it. >>> >>> This was the event that we invested so much in, looked so much forward to... Why we have not anything to say about the outcome document. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 06:24 PM, parminder wrote: >>>> Carlos, >>>> >>>> Of course you know what net neutrality is - it is there in the Marco Civil; it is not here in this document... >>>> >>>> And even the half cock term 'neutrality' has been specifically removed, by those opposed to net neutrality, and you are trying to convince us that net neutrality is still there... >>>> >>>> Not only net neutrality has been removed, 'free flow of information' which figured twice in the earlier (leaked) draft has been removed from both places.. >>>> >>>> Plus the mention of 'necessary and proportionate' principle (s) has been removed.. >>>> >>>> Plus need for agreements on restraining cyber weapons have been removed... >>>> >>>> The part on access for disabled has been weakened... >>>> >>>> The recognition in the previous document of need for mechanisms to address emerging issues and those which do not have a existing home has been greatly diluted... >>>> >>>> So, the big business has done a thorough vetting of the doc to make sure that not a wisp of anything that could even potentially interfere with their free reign on the global Internet could pass through... >>>> >>>> And what happened to other suggestions form HLC members who are to big business or the US gov... >>>> >>>> Argentinian government and Indian government (and in a way also the European Commission) had asked for the insertion of the term 'democratic' in different places where the characteristics of Internet governance were listed.... But, no, that demand was not accepted... >>>> >>>> There is no place for democracy and democratic in the land of multistakeholderism, fronting or big business interests, as the changes in the document clearly show. >>>> >>>> BTW, India in its comments on the document (as per the leaked documents) seem to have also asked for a recognition of the Internet as a global commons... but of course no... what are you talking about! >>>> >>>> What are you asking the people of the world to do with this document... To endorse it and celebrate it just becuase in about 500 places it says multi-stakeholder.... >>>> >>>> parminder >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 05:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>>>> Carol, it was not "taken out" of the document. It is there, in detail, >>>>> please re-read. >>>>> >>>>> --c.a. >>>>> >>>>> On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Carolina wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Pls, mention net neutrality which was taken out of the document put out >>>>>> for comments yesterday. More later. Should we consolidate all in a pad >>>>>> to help Nnenna? >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>> On Apr 15, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Marianne Franklin < >>>>>> m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk >>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 from me re. Nnenna's role, and +1 from me re. Anriette's points below. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> best >>>>>>> MF >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 19:44, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Congrats Nnenna! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that >>>>>>>> working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, >>>>>>>> particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society >>>>>>>> - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit >>>>>>>> :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and >>>>>>>> procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, >>>>>>>> because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of >>>>>>>> principles that defines what the public interest is in internet >>>>>>>> governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>>>>>>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this >>>>>>>> framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only >>>>>>>> - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, >>>>>>>> and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for >>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to >>>>>>>> get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only >>>>>>>> issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it >>>>>>>> is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that >>>>>>>> are not simply cosmetic. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anriette >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> + 1 >>>>>>>>> jeanette >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>>>>>>>>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>>>>>>>>> *To:* Governance >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ; >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>>>>>>>>> major issues >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, >>>>>>>>>> inviting me >>>>>>>>>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>>>>>>>>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>>>>>>>>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas >>>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major >>>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>>> will be overlooked. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>>>>>>>>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> All for now >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Nnenna >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Dr Marianne Franklin >>>>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics >>>>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program >>>>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London) >>>>>>> Department of Media & Communications >>>>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW >>>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @GloComm >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm >>>>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ >>>>>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @netrights >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Delhi Declaration.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 186287 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 andrea at digitalpolicy.it Wed Apr 16 13:37:47 2014 From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:37:47 +0200 Subject: [governance] NETmundial / Neelie Kroes: let's get to work Message-ID: [ Apologies if you receive this message multiple times ] Dear all, Concerning the forthcoming Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (NETmundial) which will take place in Sao Paulo (Brazil) on 23-24 April 2014, you might be interested to read the latest blog post of Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission and member of the High-Level Multistakeholder Committee of NETmundial, available at https://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kroes/en/content/netmundial-lets-get-workand reproduced below. +++ NETmundial: let's get to work Published by Neelie KROESon Wednesday, 16/04/2014 I will soon be travelling to Sao Paulo to attend NETmundial, the Multi-stakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance. The purpose of NETmundial is to develop principles of Internet governance and a roadmap for the future development of this ecosystem. I have already sharedwith all of you my thoughts on the draft "outcome document" that I and other members of the High-Level Multi-stakeholder Committee of NETmundialreceived on 3 April 2014. In the meantime, the organisers of the conference have published a new version of the outcome documentand are inviting everyone to send their views and comments – I warmly invite all of you to do so. I did so, too; I have sent an email to the membersof the High Level Multi-stakeholder Committee, to the Chair of the Meeting (Prof. Virgilio Almeida) and to the two co-chairs of the Executive Meeting Committee, Raul Echeberria and Demi Getschko. Again, in a spirit of transparency, I would like to share the contents of this message with the broader Internet community.... so please read my letter below. *From: KROES Neelie (CAB-KROES)* *Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 7:26 PM* *To: 'hlmc at netmundial.br '* *Subject: Proposals for the NETmundial outcome document* Dear colleagues, I am pleased to see that the draft outcome document for NETmundial has been published and that the broader public has now the possibility to intervene in the discussion, before we all meet in Sao Paulo next week. Again, I would like to thank all the members of the Executive Multistakeholder Committee, as well as the Chair and the Co-Chairs of the meeting, for their tireless work. As a follow-up to the commentswhich I have already shared with you, I would like to make some further observations. In the same spirit of transparency as my previous communication, I am also posting a copy of this e-mail on my blog . I continue to strongly believe that the outcomes of NETmundial must be concrete and actionable, with clear milestones and with a realistic but ambitious timeline. Several reactions to my comments show that I am not alone in thinking that concreteness is paramount to the success of this important gathering; and even though positions on substance may well differ, I believe that my assessment on the necessity of a "change of pace" in these discussions is shared by a broad range of stakeholders. Read in this light, it is clear me that more work is needed on the latest draft; especially if we consider that a number of public contributions submitted to NETmundial did include concrete and actionable suggestions. Luckily, several passages of the draft outcome document do lend themselves quite well to being turned into more concrete actions – and we should make full use of this opportunity. I will focus on six specific examples: 1. Improvements to the multi-stakeholder model 2. Strengthening the Internet Governance Forum 3. Tools and mechanisms for better information sharing and capacity building 4. Globalisation of IANA 5. Globalisation of ICANN 6. Jurisdictional issues on the Internet *(1) Improvements to the multi-stakeholder model* The draft outcome document refers several times to the need to *further improve and strengthen the multi-stakeholder model*, to enable the full and balanced participation of all stakeholders from around the globe, to have clear and transparent processes and procedures (including mechanisms for checks and balances and for review). I completely agree – in fact, I have said so for a long time. The keywords here are inclusiveness and openness, which must both be real and meaningful, not just theoretical. NETmundial should be the moment to properly connect the debates on Internet governance with the discussions and concrete activities on citizens' engagement and participatory democracy. Europe has been quite active in this field, ranging from EU-funded projects in the ICT field, such as DEMO-NET , Cross Overand D-CENT ; to legal innovations such as the European Citizens Initiative; to national initiatives such as the use of Liquid Democracy in the Germany and the People's Assembly Rahvakoguin Estonia, to name just a few. Brazil, with the inclusive and participatory conception and discussions on the "Marco Civil", is also an inspiration for all of us. And it is purely for reasons of space that I cannot mention all the efforts by many organisations and individuals across the world. In its Communication on Internet Policy and Governanceof 12 February 2014, the European Commission suggested that the *further development of multistakeholder guidelines and the sharing of best practices* would be a good manner to move forward. Accordingly, *I suggest that the outcomes of NETmundial should include*: - a clear commitment to the *bottom-up and cooperative* development of a "concept paper" to be discussed at the 9th Internet Governance Forum (Istanbul, Turkey, *2-5 September 2014*); - this concept paper should identify initial recommendations on how the above mentioned engagement and participatory tools and initiatives could be used in Internet governance debates; it should also propose an initial outline of principles-based guidelines to safeguard accountability, transparency, inclusiveness and independence for multi-stakeholder processes; - the discussions in Istanbul and all other appropriate fora should lead, by the *beginning of 2015*, to a proposal for two "case studies", to examine how we could turn the high-level principles into concrete, operational practices of existing Internet governance organisations and processes; - further discussions and practical experimentation on these cases studies could then result in a *concrete reference paper* to be presented and discussed at the 10th Internet Governance Forum, towards the *end of 2015* – and of course, to be further refined as need be. *(2) Strengthening the Internet Governance Forum* I referred multiple times to the *Internet Governance Forum* or IGF. The draft outcome document of NETmundial clearly mentions the need for strengthening and improving this most important and unique example of global and multi-stakeholder engagement and dialogue. I agree that such improvements should include an extension of the IGF mandate beyond its usual 5-years cycle, without prejudice to any possible adaptation of such mandate as the global community will see fit; I also agree that ensuring stable and predictable funding for the IGF is absolutely essential. I reiterate my invitation for everyone, but especially those organisations which have greatly benefited from the Internet, to become a donor to the IGF – like the EU, some of its Member States and others from the public and private sector. I believe that NETmundial should also make a clear reference, and if possible provide some practical examples, on how innovative forms of crowd-funding could contribute to this joint effort. The other improvements mentioned in the draft outcome document, namely the need to implement creative ways of providing outcomes / recommendations and the analysis of policy options, and to promote inter-sessional dialogues between the yearly gatherings of the IGF, are also essential and, in my view, closely linked to the need to better connect to existing experiences, expertise and practical tools for inclusive engagement, that I highlighted above. On this basis, *I propose that the NETmundial outcome document should ask the Multistakeholder Advisory Group to present to the global community a clear and realistic assessment of how and when, in their view, these recommendations could be concretely implemented*, at the 9th Internet Governance Forum in *September 2014*. Members of the MAG serve in their personal capacity, but are expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups; I am therefore certain that such assessment would be well informed and inclusive of all opinions. But to be even more concrete: let us not forget that, as the draft outcome document mentions, we already have a very clear set of recommendations to refer to, i.e. the *Report of the Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum*(WGIGF) of 2012. Some of these recommendations have been acted upon; some are still lingering; but more in general, I sense that we are missing a sense of the "global picture". Therefore, I would strongly *recommend that one of the concrete outputs of NETmundial should be an assessment – even if an initial one – of where we stand in terms of implementation for each recommendation of the WGIGF*, or at the very least a clear commitment that such assessment will be presented at the latest at 9th Internet Governance Forum in *September 2014*; and that this "state of play" will be duly updated and be open to public input, possibly using participatory tools as I highlighted above. *(3) Tools and mechanisms for better information sharing and capacity building* As you can certainly see, I strongly believe in the *use of appropriate ICT tools* for better and more inclusive dialogues. The NETmundial draft outcome document clearly mentions the need for communication and coordination within the Internet governance ecosystem, including via tools to perform on-going monitoring, analysis, and information-sharing function. I have already highlighted in my previous comments how the European Commission is investing in the *Global Internet Policy Observatory initiative*(GIPO) as a way to experiment with the automated collection, analysis, organisation and visualisation of information on Internet governance discussions and decisions. The European Commission is currently finalising a feasibility assessment of the technological and organisational options for the GIPO, and we will share our conclusions by *mid-2014*, with a view to launch the technological development of GIPO by the *end of 2014*. In the meantime many other organisations, public and private, are either already working or are planning to invest in Internet policy observatories and similar initiatives. We should strive to avoid duplication of efforts. Let me be crystal clear: I do not see any need for a winner-takes-all beauty contest between observatories. Quite the contrary. But we should strive to learn from each other's understanding of the problems and proposed solutions. Ideally, we should also move towards a federation of Internet policy observatories. I therefore suggest that the draft outcome document of NETmundial should *include a clear commitment to have a broad, inclusive and operational roundtable among all "observatory initiatives"* during the 9th Internet Governance Forum in *September 2014*; ideally, this roundtable should lead to the development of an initial "*collaboration roadmap*" by *mid-2015* and identify mechanisms, including via existing meetings and dialogues, to foster cooperation and communication among these various initiatives. *(4) Globalisation of IANA* You already know how important I believe it is to keep the momentum towards a real and effective globalisation of core Internet functions and decisions, including IANA. ICANN has recently shared a draft "scoping paper" and a roadmap that will certainly be helpful in the discussions on the globalisation of IANA. *I believe that the NETmundial outcome document should explicitly recognise this draft proposal by ICANN as an important contribution and explicitly call all stakeholders to express their views on it*. *I also believe that in order for this discussion to be truly meaningful, the NETmundial outcome document should clearly flag that*: - the engagement of the broader public should make full use of *all** existing meetings and fora*, including the global Internet Governance Forum and the regional ones, as appropriate; ICANN should also reach out to organisations across the world which are willing and capable to foster dialogue among citizens, besides and beyond those who are able to attend the meetings of ICANN or other Internet technical organisations; - with due consideration to the criteria which the US Government has presented in its announcement of 14 March 2014, *there should be no artificial limitation in the scope of the discussion*. For example, a consideration of *various organisational options*, as well as of the *opportunity* and the *most appropriate ways to separate policy, operational and oversight activities* should not be "off-limits", if we want the debate on the future of IANA to be seen as truly legitimate at the global level. *(5) Globalisation of ICANN* The CEO of ICANN has recently declaredthat a public dialogue on how to strengthen ICANN’s accountability will soon be launched. In my view, this dialogue cannot be separated from the broader issue of how to make ICANN a truly global organization serving the public interest, as the draft outcome document mentions. I understand that this dialogue will look at strengthening existing accountability mechanisms like the Affirmation of Commitments, and ICANN’s redress mechanisms, as well as exploring new accountability mechanisms where necessary. I am looking forward to further information and details and I expect that ICANN will also provide a clear timeline on the concrete implementation of its globalisation efforts. Accordingly, I *recommend that the NETmundial outcome document clearly invites ICANN to share its concrete proposals* at the 50th ICANN meeting (London, UK, *22-26 June 2014*). *(6) Jurisdictional issues on the Internet* It is natural, when talking about globalisation, to reflect not only on the amazing opportunities brought about by the Internet, but also on the challenges which this inherently cross-border medium raises with respect to the application of laws. The European Commission committedto launching an in-depth review of the risks, at international level, of conflicts of laws and jurisdictions arising on the Internet and to assess all mechanisms, processes and tools available and necessary to solve such conflicts. The NETmundial draft outcome document clearly identifies jurisdictional issues and how they relate to Internet governance as "material for further discussion". While I understand and agree that a full debate on this broad topic during NETmundial would be neither desirable nor productive, *we should have a stronger commitment to a phase-by-phase examination of this issue*, with a view to produce "good practice" guidelines as appropriate. Accordingly, *I suggest that the outcomes of NETmundial should include *an invitation to interested parties to: - develop a "scoping paper" by *July 2014*; - facilitate on-line and off-line engagement opportunities, as appropriate, in the run-up to the 9th Internet Governance Forum (Istanbul, Turkey, *2-5 September 2014*); - following these discussions, aim to produce a first draft of "problem statements" and possible recommendations by the *first half of 2015*. Dear colleagues, I thank you for your patience in reading my observations and proposals, which I trust will be useful in further refining the outcome document of NETmundial. Kind regards, Neelie Kroes +++ 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Wed Apr 16 16:59:07 2014 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 16:59:07 -0400 Subject: [governance] QUESTION TO ADAM - NETmundial documents online for comment Message-ID: Adam, Will the organizers consolidate the comments into a new document?! If no....why should we be commenting on it? (this second is just a rhetoric question to understand the process) On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > Please see Use the Navigate button. > > Comments will close April 21th, 12:00 UTC. > > Adam > > > > WELCOME TO NETMUNDIAL PUBLIC COMMENTS PAGE > > After an open call for content contribution, NETmundial – the Global > Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance – received > 188 documents from 46 different countries. These documents were sent by > representatives of Civil Society, Private Sector, Academy, Governments and > Technical Community. > > Based on these broad set of inputs, NETmundial’s Executive > Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) prepared a Draft Outcome Document and > submitted it for consultation with NETmundial’s High-level Multistakeholder > Committee (HLMC) on April 3rd, 2014. After incorporating the inputs from > the HLMC, under the guidance of NETmundial’s Chair and Co-Chairs, a final > version of the document is released here for public comments. The public > consultation will be open for comments on NETmundial’s Executive Committee > Output Document from April 14th until April 21th, 12:00 UTC. > > For this public consultation a commenting tool is available online at > http://document.netmundial.br/ with the purpose of receiving public > comments on specific points of the document. It is not necessary to create > an account in order to post your comment to the document. You’ll be able to > immediately start reading the document and whenever you have something to > say, you’ll just have to provide a full name and contact email address > alongside your comment. > > By clicking on any paragraph of the document, you’ll be able to see all > the comments other people have already made pertaining to that portion of > the text; as referred above, you are also granted the possibility to > register your own observations. Maybe your concern was already addressed in > someone else’s comment, so please be sure to take a look at the previous > comments before making yours. > > This public consultation closes the loop that started by collecting public > content contributions. Such contributions were compiled and merged into the > Outcome Document by the NETmundial EMC and HLMC committees in the spirit of > trying to represent the overall context of the current Internet Governance > debate. It is very important to receive further public input in this final > stage, so that the outcome is true to the issues and concerns presented by > all stakeholders. > > END > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- *Carolina Rossini* *Project Director, Latin America Resource Center* Open Technology Institute *New America Foundation* // http://carolinarossini.net/ + 1 6176979389 *carolina.rossini at gmail.com* skype: carolrossini @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From rishab.bailey at gmail.com Wed Apr 16 17:21:42 2014 From: rishab.bailey at gmail.com (Rishab Bailey) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 02:51:42 +0530 Subject: [governance] Society for Knowledge Commons statement on High Level Committee iteration of the NetMundial Outcome Document Message-ID: Hi All, Please find appended below a statement from Knowledge Commons on the High Level Committee iteration of the NetMundial Outcome Document. The statement can also be accessed on the Knowledge Commons website at www.kcbrasil.org Regards Rishab Bailey (for the Society for Knowledge Commons) **** *Knowledge Commons Statement on the latest iteration of the NetMundial Outcome Document* On 14 April 2014, the High Level Committee (HLC) of NetMundial published the latest version of the draft outcome document at *http://document.netmundial.br/ * This document has numerous changes to the draft document prepared by the Executive Stakeholder Committee, which Knowledge Commons has previously commented on. Having read and analysedall 187 submissions made to the meeting, it is our considered view that the latest draft of the outcome document significantly waters down many of the progressive positions mentioned in the first iteration prepared by the Executive Stakeholder Committee. *First,* The document does not adequately respond to and prohibit mass surveillance – which was one of the issues that prompted the call for this meeting in the first place. The document has dropped reference to “necessary and proportionate” principles and does not prohibit the practices of targeting innocent civilians around the world of which Snowden has made us all aware *Second, *the deletion of references to an international agreement to protect against cyber warfare is a serious concern. As more and more critical infrastructure resources around the world are maintained and operated through digital mechanisms, ensuring the security of these installations from targeted attacks is critical. Such an agreement is the core business of governments. *Third, *the document departs from accepted notions of multistakeholderism as notably enshrined in the Tunis Agenda by recommending that all stakeholders be placed on an equal footing, irrespective of their roles and responsibilities. This turns the concept of representative democracy on its head by permitting those with financial interests to frustrate the will of legitimate and representative organisations. *Fourth, *the document attempts to ensure accountability and transparency of multistakeholder organizations including by putting in place periodic reporting requirements. We continue to believe that there would be greater utility in clearly defining the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders and specifying the elements of a minimum standard set of guidelines, operating procedures, or the identification of an entity to elaborate these modalities for multistakeholder fora. *Fifth, *the document fails to recognize the need for a separation between policy processes and operational aspects of ICANN. We believe there is a need to ensure structures are put in place that can ensure public policy is framed in a legitimate, representative fashion. It is essential that the role of governments within ICANN be spelt out and re-affirmed. By watering down the language on transition on IANA functions and the restructured role of ICANN, we believe that the High Level Committee has missed an opportunity to ensure global pressure on the USA to relinquish control over a resource that is a global commons. **** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit 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 Apr 16 17:46:14 2014 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 03:16:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society major issues In-Reply-To: <534EAB6D.70901@itforchange.net> References: <28D7250BBB2E4798BC6C1B7A93337D53@Toshiba> <534CDE5B.2010906@wzb.eu> <534CE344.2050200@apc.org> <534CFFD8.1090100@gold.ac.uk> <7CE12A31-A7B2-4BA9-A1C0-25FD6E6A7F03@gmail.com> <534D1CB0.4030301@cafonso.ca> <534D2C08.7050207@itforchange.net> <534E56AE.3020800@itforchange.net> <534EA0F2.3080500@apc.org> <534EAB6D.70901@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Public versus publicly owned .. Publicly owned too is vague enough .. but do you mean for example standards owned through the ietf rather than ITU? Still rather more clear than just stating "public standards" --srs (iPad) > On 16-Apr-2014, at 21:40, parminder wrote: > > >> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 09:16 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >> what is the value of "public" in "based on open public standards"? Does the word public add clarity? Does it tell us something otherwise missing? > > If it had no value, trust me, it wont have been removed... But to answer your question, I quote principle 10 of the 'Delhi Declaration for a Just and Equitable Internet' (enclosed) > > "An open and decentralized Internet requires strict enforcement of open and public standards. Open standards allow fully interoperable implementation by anyone in any type of software, including Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). The trend towards privatisation of digital standards must be stemmed and measures must be introduced to ensure that standards are publicly owned, freely accessible and implementable. " > > I hope this answers your question.. I can of course elaborate further. > > No we did not write principle just to spite those who removed the 'public standard' part from the draft :). This principle was of course written much earlier. > > parminder > > >> >> Drafts are there for comment and revision, one thing comments on the leaked document made quite clear is the need to shorten the final document (and usually the same group that said the document is too long then added more words of their own...) >> >> The relevant paragraph as it stands in the document for comment is: >> >> Internet governance should promote open standards, informed by individual and collective expertise and practical experience and decisions made by open consensus, that allow for a unique, interoperable, resilient, stable, decentralized, secure, and interconnected network, available to all. Standards must be consistent with human rights and allow development and innovation. >> >> (25, in http://document.netmundial.br/1-internet-governance-principles/) >> >> Is this weak? How can it be improved? 6 comments so far, are they helpful? >> >> Adam (in my individual capacity) >> >> >> On Apr 17, 2014, at 12:25 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >> >>> Agree with Parminder. >>> >>> We need to comment on these omissions. Is best strategy for us to just all comment as individuals, or organisations, or to also try and do collaborative submissions? >>> >>> But I would not blame big business Parminder. >>> >>> Texts coming out of intergovernmental processes like the WSIS +10 are also problematic from a public-interest perspective. >>> >>> Anriette >>> >>> >>> On 16/04/2014 12:08, parminder wrote: >>>> And yes, I forgot to mention, 'public' has disappeared from 'open and public standards' which was in the initial draft...... >>>> >>>> I think we need to be discussing the draft netmundial outcome document that has been put for public comments.. >>>> >>>> Can people tell me one good thing about the document... I have not heard anyone present it. >>>> >>>> This was the event that we invested so much in, looked so much forward to... Why we have not anything to say about the outcome document. >>>> >>>> parminder >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 06:24 PM, parminder wrote: >>>>> Carlos, >>>>> >>>>> Of course you know what net neutrality is - it is there in the Marco Civil; it is not here in this document... >>>>> >>>>> And even the half cock term 'neutrality' has been specifically removed, by those opposed to net neutrality, and you are trying to convince us that net neutrality is still there... >>>>> >>>>> Not only net neutrality has been removed, 'free flow of information' which figured twice in the earlier (leaked) draft has been removed from both places.. >>>>> >>>>> Plus the mention of 'necessary and proportionate' principle (s) has been removed.. >>>>> >>>>> Plus need for agreements on restraining cyber weapons have been removed... >>>>> >>>>> The part on access for disabled has been weakened... >>>>> >>>>> The recognition in the previous document of need for mechanisms to address emerging issues and those which do not have a existing home has been greatly diluted... >>>>> >>>>> So, the big business has done a thorough vetting of the doc to make sure that not a wisp of anything that could even potentially interfere with their free reign on the global Internet could pass through... >>>>> >>>>> And what happened to other suggestions form HLC members who are to big business or the US gov... >>>>> >>>>> Argentinian government and Indian government (and in a way also the European Commission) had asked for the insertion of the term 'democratic' in different places where the characteristics of Internet governance were listed.... But, no, that demand was not accepted... >>>>> >>>>> There is no place for democracy and democratic in the land of multistakeholderism, fronting or big business interests, as the changes in the document clearly show. >>>>> >>>>> BTW, India in its comments on the document (as per the leaked documents) seem to have also asked for a recognition of the Internet as a global commons... but of course no... what are you talking about! >>>>> >>>>> What are you asking the people of the world to do with this document... To endorse it and celebrate it just becuase in about 500 places it says multi-stakeholder.... >>>>> >>>>> parminder >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 05:19 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>>>>> Carol, it was not "taken out" of the document. It is there, in detail, >>>>>> please re-read. >>>>>> >>>>>> --c.a. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Carolina wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Pls, mention net neutrality which was taken out of the document put out >>>>>>> for comments yesterday. More later. Should we consolidate all in a pad >>>>>>> to help Nnenna? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 15, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Marianne Franklin < >>>>>>> m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 from me re. Nnenna's role, and +1 from me re. Anriette's points below. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> best >>>>>>>> MF >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 19:44, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Congrats Nnenna! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Put on one of your fabulous outfits, and then remind them, that >>>>>>>>> working inclusively and respectfully with all stakeholder groups, >>>>>>>>> particularly those that lack power and influence - i.e. civil society >>>>>>>>> - is very different from putting on a colourful West African outfit >>>>>>>>> :) It takes hard work, change in behaviour, change in structures and >>>>>>>>> procedures, consultation, respect, trust, debate, and struggle, >>>>>>>>> because do not always agree. It also requires a common framework of >>>>>>>>> principles that defines what the public interest is in internet >>>>>>>>> governance that can be used to promote and protect this public >>>>>>>>> interest across the internet governance ecosystem and it is this >>>>>>>>> framework that we trust the NetMundial can get us closer to. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You could also mention surveillance, with particularly - but not only >>>>>>>>> - mass surveillance demonstrating how easy it is to destroy trust, >>>>>>>>> and to deny accountability. And, is there any tougher test for >>>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder internet governance? I think it would be good to >>>>>>>>> get the message accross that the IANA transition is not the only >>>>>>>>> issue that NetMundial should be discussing, but at the same time, it >>>>>>>>> is a key opportunity to come up with solutions and approaches that >>>>>>>>> are not simply cosmetic. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anriette >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 15/04/2014 09:23, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> + 1 >>>>>>>>>> jeanette >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Am 15.04.14 08:38, schrieb Ian Peter: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Congratulations Nnenna – great choice! >>>>>>>>>>> *From:* Nnenna Nwakanma >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:35 PM >>>>>>>>>>> *To:* Governance >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ; >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [bestbits] Nnenna to Keynote at Netmundial - Civil Society >>>>>>>>>>> major issues >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I got a message this morning from NetMundial Chair, Virgilo, >>>>>>>>>>> inviting me >>>>>>>>>>> to speak at the Opening Ceremony of Netmundial (meaning I have to pack >>>>>>>>>>> one of those African dresses) for some 8 minutes. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I have replied to say "I will be speaking from the Civil Society >>>>>>>>>>> perspective, which is my Stakeholder Group". >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> There is a Web Foundation media team that will help me put my ideas >>>>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>>>> place, but I cannot not request input from here, so that no major >>>>>>>>>>> issues >>>>>>>>>>> will be overlooked. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I travel Thursday evening thru Friday, so the earliest I can share a >>>>>>>>>>> draft/keypoints will be Monday. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hope we can pull this off well. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> All for now >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Nnenna >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Dr Marianne Franklin >>>>>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics >>>>>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program >>>>>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London) >>>>>>>> Department of Media & Communications >>>>>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW >>>>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> @GloComm >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm >>>>>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ >>>>>>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> www.internetrightsandprincipl