[governance] Input Document with Policy Statement on Net Neutrality
CW Mail
mail at christopherwilkinson.eu
Mon Sep 21 14:35:23 EDT 2015
Dear Luca:
Thankyou. I am glad that this project has evolved to this stage.
Regarding the track-changes amendments, I think that they are an improvement and support them.
Regarding the List of Contributors, I would prefer to appear without affiliation. In any event, I am not affiliated with ISOC Luxembourg.
Many thanks and best wishes to you all
Christopher Wilkinson.
On 21 Sep 2015, at 04:32, LB at lucabelli.net wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Please find in attachment and below the draft Input Document on Network Neutrality to be presented at the IGF main session on dynamic coalitions' outcomes. The Input Document contains the consolidated version of the Policy Statement on Network Neutrality, which has been updated considering the comments published on the IGF website so far. http://review.intgovforum.org/igf-2015/dynamic-coalitions/dynamic-coalition-on-network-neutrality-dcnn/
>
> All modifications are in track changes. Should you have any comments or suggestions on the Input Document, please share them on the DCNN mailing-list by 27 September. http://mailman.edri.org/mailman/listinfo/nncoalition
>
> The finalised Input Document will be published on the IGF website by 1st October. It will be possible to post comments on the Input Document after its publication online but the text will not be modified after 1 October.
>
> Best regards,
> Luca
>
> __________________
>
> Input Document on Network Neutrality
>
>
>
> This input document has been developed through an open and multistakeholder process facilitated by the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Network Neutrality (DCNN). The process has been initiated with a Request for Comments aimed at the development of one or more Policy Statement(s) on Net Neutrality. The process has been promoted by members of the DCNN and the Global Net Neutrality Coalition (GNN), and aimed at the definition of an agreed position on net neutrality, based on the Model Framework on Network Neutrality developed by the DCNN.
>
> The DCNN Model Framework (MF) was presented at the 8th IGF in Bali and included in a Report on “Protecting Human Rights through Network Neutrality” delivered to the Council of Europe Steering Committee on Media and Information Society to be used as a working document for the elaboration of a Draft Recommendation on Net Neutrality. To date, DCNN members have conveyed the MF to several Parliamentary assemblies (EU Parliament, Argentinian Senate and South Korean Parliament) whilst the GNN has decided to utilize the MF as “Model Rules”. Although it has already played an inspirational role, the MF has never been officially validated by the IGF community at-large, as pointed out by the Final Chair's Summary of the IGF 2014, according to which “[t]he ninth IGF concluded with looking at the role of the IGF in taking the network neutrality discussion forward. [...] The Dynamic Coalition on Network Neutrality will continue the discussions leading up to the 2015 meeting, but the view was also held that there was a need to develop a process that allowed the entire IGF community to weigh in and validate the findings of the Dynamic Coalition.”
>
> This lack of validation is primarily due to the lack of an official process aimed at discussing dynamic coalitions' outcomes within the IGF community. The IGF 2015 will introduce for the first time a main session allowing dynamic coalitions to present their work to the broader community, thus contributing to the definition tangible IGF outputs, as recommended by the CSTD Working Group for IGF Improvement. The development of a Policy Statement on Network Neutrality is consistent with the Chair’s Summary and aims at feeding the main session on dynamic coalitions’ outcomes with a concrete proposal.
>
> The Policy Statement on Network Neutrality has been elaborated through several rounds of consultation, organised from the beginning of May to the end of September 2015. According to DC NN Rules of Procedure, two drafters have been designated in order to “manage the elaboration of the position or statement and consolidate received comments with the aim of achieving a consensus document.”
> The two designated drafters were:
> · Luca Belli, DCNN Co-Chair and Researcher at the Center for Technology & Society at Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro
> · Michał Woźniak, Warsaw Hackerspace and Polish Linux Users Group
>
>
> Policy Statement on Network Neutrality
>
> Preamble
> a) The Internet should be open, secure and accessible to all people.
> b) Network Neutrality plays an instrumental role in preserving Internet openness; fostering the enjoyment of Internet users' human rights; promoting competition and equality of opportunity; safeguarding the generative peer-to-peer nature of the Internet; and spreading the benefits of the Internet to all people.
> c) Managing Internet traffic in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner compatible with the Network Neutrality Principle serves the interests of the public by preserving a level playing field with minimal barriers to entry and by providing equal opportunity for the invention and development of new applications, services and business models.
> d) Competition among broadband networks, technologies and all players of the Internet ecosystem is essential to ensure the openness of the Internet.
>
> 1. Network Neutrality Principle
> Network Neutrality is the principle according to which Internet traffic is shall be treated without discrimination, restriction or interference regardless of its sender, recipient, type or content, so that Internet users’ freedom is not restricted by unreasonably favouring or disfavouring (technically, financially, economically or otherwise) the transmission of specific Internet traffic.
>
> 2. Non-discriminatoryReasonable Traffic Management
> In accordance with the Network Neutrality Principle, Internet service providers shall should not restrict, block, discriminate, filter, or otherwise interfere with Internet traffic. Any deviation from this principle may be considered as reasonable traffic management as long as it is necessary and proportionate to:
> a) give force to a court order or a legal provision in accordance with human rights norms and international law;
> b) preserve network security and integrity;
> c) mitigate the effects of temporary and exceptional congestion, primarily by means of applicationprotocol-agnostic measures or, when these measures do not prove efficientpracticable, by means of applicationprotocol-specific measures;.
> d) prioritise emergency services in the case of unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure.
> In particular, the availability and quality of Internet access services should not be degraded impaired by or for the provision of other services, including those requiring special level of quality or security, provided by the Internet service provider.
>
> 3. Transparent Traffic Management
> Internet service providers shall should publish meaningful and transparent information on characteristics and conditions of the Internet access services they offer, the connection speeds that are to be provided, and their traffic management practices, notably with regard to how Internet access services may be affected by simultaneous usage of other services provided by the Internet service provider.
>
> 4. Privacy
> All players on the Internet value chain, including governments, shall comply with privacy and data protection norms and international law. In particular, any techniques to inspect or analyse Internet traffic shall be in accordance with privacy and data protection obligations and subject to clear legal protections.
>
> 5. Implementation and Enforcement
> In order to enforce the Network Neutrality Principle, tThe competent national authorities should promote independent testing of Internet traffic management practices, ensure the availability of Internet access and evaluate the compatibility of Internet access policies with the Network Neutrality Principle as well as with the respect of human rights norms and international law. National authorities should publicly report their findings. Complaint procedures to address network neutrality violations should be available and violations should attract appropriate fines.
>
>
>
>
>
> List of Contributors
>
> · Luca Belli, Fundação Getulio Vargas (co-drafter)
> · Michal Wozniak, Polish Linux Users Group (co-drafter)
> · Gonzalo Lopez-Baracas, Telefonica
> · Eduardo Chomali, Telefonica
> · Chris Riley, Mozilla
> · Jeremy Malcolm, EFF
> · Abhik Chaudhuri, Tata Consultancy
> · Lorenzo Pupillo, Telecom Italia
> · Grupo Usuarios de Interent en Ecuados
> · Sudeep KC, Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation
> · TechFreedom
> · Ekenda Lamsal, ICT Expert dedicated to #ICT4DNepal
> · Facebook
> · Chris Marsden, Sussex University
> · Konstantinos Stylianou, Leeds University
> · William Ametozion, Network Engineer
> · Kamumuri Sraju, entrepreneur and technolgist
> · Nathalia Foditch, Washington University
> · Greg Shatan, Abelman Frayne & Schwab
> · Brandt Dainow, iMedia Connection
> · Seth Johnson, Internet Distinction
> · Parminder Jeet Sing, ICT for Change
> · ACCESS
> · Roslyn Layton, University of Copenhagen
> · John Laprise, Consulting Scholar
> · Christopher Wilkinson, ISOC Luxembourg
> · Vint Cerf, Google
> · Cellular Operator Association of India
> · European Digital Rights
> · Judith Hellerstein, University of Maryland
> · Richard Hill, Association for Proper Internet Governance
> · Fastweb
> · European Broadcasting Union
> · Chip Sharp, CISCO
> · Louise Nasak, Individual Consultancy Group
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Luca Belli, PhD
> Researcher, Center for Technology & Society, FGV Rio de Janeiro
> Founder and Co-chair, IGF Dynamic Coalition on Network Neutrality
> Co-founder and Co-chair, IGF Dynamic Coalition on Platform Responsibility
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> <DCNN Input Document with track-changes.doc>____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To 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: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150921/82f8dc08/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list