[governance] Finding IGC voice... again, on NETMundial and beyond.

[parminder at itforchange.net]

> Hi Mawaki
>
> I think it would be great if IGC could make some sort of submission for
> NetMundial, but with a March 8 deadline and a preceding consensus call it
> may prove difficult
>
> I would leave my proposal re IANA out of it because I know many here have
> different opinions (some slight, some major) and I dont think a consensus
> statement could be achieved.

Ian

We can take the spirit of your IANA proposal while at the same time
accommodating differences about it perhaps through a formulation like the
following:

"Unilateral oversight by the US government of CIR management is
undemocratic and untenable. It should immediately be replaced by an
appropriate alternate mechanism where all people of the world have an
equal role"

We may add this principle to Luois' principles..

parminder







So perhaps we should concentrate on Louis’s
> list of principles, ie
>
>
> 1 - On-line users must enjoy the same human rights as they do off-line.
>
> 2- There must not be discrimination in access and contents due to criteria
> such as opinion, religion, race, gender, geography, language, or economic
> resources.
>
> 3- Services offered in the internet must remain equitable and neutral
> among service providers, without taking unfair advantage of a dominant or
> privileged position.
>
> 4- Internet availability, deployment, and service conditions must benefit
> all segments of the human society, not just those enjoying richer economic
> development.
>
> 5- A special effort must be engaged in order to provide the Less Developed
> Countries with an equitable share of resources to participate in
> activities related to worldwide internet governance.
>
>
> I would immediately agree to these – and I know Louis mentioned this was
> being worked on for a NetMundial submission – Louis, if you would like
> to, and could put forward a final draft by say COB Tuesday, I think that
> would allow time for consensus adoption and submission, or for IGC to be a
> co-signatory?
>
>
> Ian Peter
>
> From: Mawaki Chango
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 7:55 AM
> To: Internet Governance ; Deirdre Williams
> Subject: [governance] Finding IGC voice... again, on NETMundial and
> beyond.
>
> Dear All,
>
> First of all, I wish to apologize on behalf of Deirdre and myself for the
> prolonged silence. We both have been caught at the same time in other
> immediate commitments with various demands on our time, including
> traveling and the burdens that come with (starting with the reason why one
> might be traveling in the first place which can only be carried out during
> the limited time of such travels.) Anyway, you get my drift...
>
> Now I'd like to get the ball rolling on things that we as IGC might want
> to do this year by building on those who have already posted ideas and
> suggestions regarding the NetMundial at São Paulo. While it may be late
> for starting to prepare a written submission which is expected to be in by
> March 8, perhaps we may still start working out something that could be
> delivered during the proceedings if we are given the opportunity (or
> simply as a first step in the formulation of some basic ideas we might
> seek consensus on at some point in the process in response to Ig
> challenges of the day, even beyond São Paulo.)
>
> On that note, I remember Antonio Medina Gómez sending to the list a note
> dated Jan 22 where he volunteered "to attend the meeting and act as
> Rapporteur for the IGC to report back on meetings in real time. Let me
> know what your thoughts are. I will also update you daily and at the end
> of the meeting produce a report on key observations. I think having a team
> of IGC rapporteurs would be useful and I am willing to volunteer."
>
>
> So maybe beyond written submissions, the question that looms ahead is: How
> are we going to organize IGC presence and participation in the proceedings
> in São Paulo?
>
> Meanwhile and for immediate consideration, I have seen over the recent
> days two proposals/statements that appear to me a good starting point for
> discussing any possible input by IGC or subsets/member of IGC. One is more
> about principles and the other more focused on a practical solution to one
> problem. I have copied and pasted them as follows.
>
> [SOURCE: Louis Pouzin, mail posted on Feb 28]
>
> 1 - On-line users must enjoy the same human rights as they do off-line.
>
> 2- There must not be discrimination in access and contents due to criteria
> such as opinion, religion, race, gender, geography, language, or economic
> resources.
>
> 3- Services offered in the internet must remain equitable and neutral
> among service providers, without taking unfair advantage of a dominant or
> privileged position.
>
> 4- Internet availability, deployment, and service conditions must benefit
> all segments of the human society, not just those enjoying richer economic
> development.
>
> 5- A special effort must be engaged in order to provide the Less Developed
> Countries with an equitable share of resources to participate in
> activities related to worldwide internet governance.
>
>
>
> [SOURCE: Ian Peter, mail posted on Feb 28]
>
>
> Roadmap (and principles) for internalisation of the former  IANA functions
> within the multistakeholder ICANN model.
>
> This roadmap concentrates on one internet governance issue only – the
> future of the IANA functions which have been the subject of much past
> discussion because current arrangements are seen by many to be outside of
> the preferred multistakeholder model.
>
> Indeed, IANA itself was established  in an era before current internet
> governance models (multistakeholder) and governance institutions (eg
> ICANN) were in existence.
>
> ROADMAP
>
> This roadmap suggests that the IANA functions, though necessary processes
> in the secure and authoritative functioning of the Internet, no longer
> need a separate entity and would more productively merged with similar
> functions under the auspices of ICANN. Subject of course to many concerns
> about details, this direction appears to have widespread support from
> governments, civil society, technical community, and private sector.
>
> In order to achieve this desired change efficiently and productively, the
> following roadmap is proposed.
>
> 1.       ICANN should be requested to prepare a proposal for management of
> the previous IANA functions within the ICANN multistakeholder model,
> bearing in mind the following criteria:
>
> (a) protection of the root zone from political or other improper
> interference;
>
> (b) integrity, stability, continuity, security and robustness of the
> administration of the root zone;
>
> (c) widespread [international] trust by Internet users in the
> administration of this function; (d) support of a single unified root
> zone; and
>
> (e) agreement regarding an accountability mechanism for this function that
> is broadly accepted as being in the global public interest."
>
> 2. Preparation of the proposal should involve discussion with all major
> stakeholder groups, with a completion timetable for a first draft for
> discussion at the Internet Governance Forum in Turkey in September 2014.
>
> 3. To expedite completion in a timely manner, it is suggested that outside
> consultants be engaged to prepare the discussion paper (proposal) in
> consultation with major stakeholders.
>
> 4. The solution must have the following characteristics
>
> (a) offers a legal structure that is robust against rogue litigation
> attacks
>
> (b) is aligned with the Internet technical infrastructure in a way that
> supports innovative, technology based evolution of the DNS .
>
> (c) is an inclusive model
>
> (d) is a demonstrable improvement on current processes in this area
>
> END of proposals
>
> Deirdre also has suggested the possibility of a series of very short
> statements (micro-blogging kind of length) to capture succinct positions
> on critical points. She will probably say more on that in the next couple
> of days.
>
> Meanwhile I am inviting you all to step forward and share your thought
> about the above.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
> Mawaki
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To 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