This from the governance list. Carlton Samuels ======================================================================== ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ian Peter <ian.peter@ianpeter.com> Date: Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:23 PM Subject: RE: [governance] RE: Statement to the February OC: the way forward To: governance@lists.cpsr.org Just a couple of suggested additions below. We do need to move to a consensus call on this within a day or two.

The Internet Governance Caucus supports "Rights and principles" as a major theme for IGF-4 in Egypt. This should lead to discourse at the IGF meetings leading towards the definition and clarification of rights in relation to the Internet, and how they relate to pre-existing definitions of human rights. It also includes a space for discussions about the responsibilities of all parties.

I agree. We seem to have general agreement to move from our previous statements of rights as a theme to rights and principles

The concept of "rights" continues to stress the importance of openness and universal access. This framework will continue to emphasize the significant themes of access to knowledge and development, while adding the important issues of basic user rights and control to access, content and applications of their choice, in keeping with current international debates.

Although I agree with this phrasing, I wonder what people think about us not mentioning net neutrality at all or whether an addition such as "this includes elements of the network neutrality debate" would be useful

The inclusion of "principles" allows for wide discussion of the responsibilities that the different stakeholders have to each other. Without invoking legislation or prohibitions, it allows for open examination of the principles that should govern the Internet, particularly in its commercial facets.

Within the mandate of the IGF and in support of strengthening this multistakeholder process, we ask that the IGF Secretariat continue and expand the use of Remote Participation as a tool for attendance at the IGF 2009 in Egypt as a proven method to include new voices. To that end, we recommend that the Secretariat recognize the Remote Participation Working Group as a collaborating organization for the RP at the IGF 2009, especially in the area of Hub participation, and facilitate the use of the RP resources from the first planning stages for this 4th meeting.

-----Mensaje original----- De: Ginger Paque [mailto:ginger@paque.net] Enviado el: Miércoles, 21 de Enero de 2009 03:41 p.m. Para: 'governance@lists.cpsr.org' Asunto: Statement OC February OC: the way forward

In parallel to the discussion on the IGC statement to the OC about the IGF process review as started by Ian, we must start a draft of our statement on the way forward, proposing the themes of rights, net neutrality within openness and universal access and possibly remote participation, as have been in discussion on the list.

I suggest we start our discussion with this short draft (the previous IGC statement "Rights and the Internet as the over-arching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt" is copied below for your reference):

The Internet Governance Caucus supports "Rights and principles" as a major theme for IGF-4 in Egypt. This should lead to discourse at the IGF meetings leading towards the definition and clarification of rights in relation to the Internet, and how they relate to pre-existing definitions of human rights. It also includes a space for discussions about the responsibilities of all parties.

The concept of "rights" continues to stress the importance of openness and universal access. This framework will continue to emphasize the significant themes of access to knowledge and development, while adding the important issues of basic user rights and control to access, content and applications of their choice, in keeping with current international debates.

The inclusion of "principles" allows for wide discussion of the responsibilities that the different stakeholders have to each other. Without invoking legislation or prohibitions, it allows for open examination of the principles that should govern the Internet, particularly in its commercial facets.

Within the mandate of the IGF and in support of strengthening this multistakeholder process, we ask that the IGF Secretariat continue and expand the use of Remote Participation as a tool for attendance at the IGF 2009 in Egypt as a proven method to include new voices. To that end, we recommend that the Secretariat recognize the Remote Participation Working Group as a collaborating organization for the RP at the IGF 2009, especially in the area of Hub participation, and facilitate the use of the RP resources from the first planning stages for this 4th meeting.

I look forward to your ideas on this. Regards, Ginger

IGC previous statement: Rights and the Internet as the over-arching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt

The Internet Governance Caucus strongly recommends that 'Rights and the Internet' be made the overarching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt, and that the IGF-4's program be framed by the desire for developing a rights-based discourse in the area of Internet Governance. The Caucus has already expressed support for the letter on this subject which was sent to the MAG by the Dynamic Coalition on an Internet Bill of Rights.

The IGC offers the IGF assistance in helping to shape such a discourse at the IGF meetings, and specifically to help make 'Rights and the Internet' an overarching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt.

A complex new emerging ecology of rights and the internet

One important purpose of a discourse on rights should be to clarify and reach greater consensus on how rights with respect to the Internet are defined, how they relate to pre-existing definitions of human rights, and which ones need to be internationally recognized and strengthened. Within this context, we acknowledge that, even within the civil society caucus, differences of opinion exist as to the nature of various rights and conceptual rights and the degree to which they should be emphasized in internet governance discussions.

While the internet opens unprecedented economic, social and political opportunities in many areas, many fear that it may at the same time be further widening economic, social and political divides. It is for this reason that development has been a central theme for the IGF meetings to date. In this new, more global and digital context it might be useful to explore what the term "right to development" means.

With respect to privacy rights, corporations and governments are increasingly able to extend digital tentacles into people's homes and personal devices, in manners invisible to consumers and citizens. Consumers of digital products thus face new challenges including the right <http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dcskr5r9_7n2dnxhs&justBody=fa ls e&revision=_latest×tamp=1220550114112&editMode=true&strip=true#sdfoot no te3sym> to know and completely 'own' the products and services they pay for. Technological measures to monitor and control user behavior on the internet are becoming increasingly sophisticated, and often outrun public policies and traditional concepts of what rights users have.

While property rights are of considerable importance, their applicability and mutations in the digital environment have led to widespread political contention over the proper scope of copyrights, trademarks and patents. In fact, intellectual property is emerging as a primary area of socio- economic conflict in the information society. The IGF can explore issues surrounding the public interest principles which underpin intellectual property claims alongside the concept of a right to access knowledge in the digital space It can also explore how individuals' property right to own, build, test, and use consumer electronics, computers and other forms of equipment can be reconciled with the regulation of technical circumvention to protect copyrights.

It may also be useful to explore if and how other concepts may be meaningful in relation to the Internet - for instance, a 'right to access the Internet unconditional of the use being made of it (similar to electricity and telephone). Similarly, a right of cultural _expression_, and a right to have an Internet in ones own language, could inform the important IGF thematic area of cultural diversity.

Other important internet policy areas, like network neutrality, are being framed in terms of rights, such as a right to access and share information, or as an extension of freedom of _expression_ itself. The right of the public to access government-produced information presents itself in a wholly new manner in a digital environment, where information is often publicly sharable at little or no extra cost. Positive acts of withholding digital public information from citizens in fact can be looked upon as a form of censorship. All of these rights-based conceptions may be included in the IGF openness theme area along with open standards Other rights such as the right of association and the right to political participation may have important new implications in the internet age,

We recognize that while it is relatively easy to articulate and claim "rights" it is much more difficult to agree on, implement and enforce them. We also recognize that rights claims can sometimes conflict or compete with each other. There can also be uncertainty about the proper application of a rights claim to a factual situation. The change in the technical methods of communication often undermines pre-existing understandings of how to apply legal categories.

These complexities, however, only strengthen the case for using the IGF to explicitly discuss and debate these problems. There is no other global forum where such issues can be raised and explored in a non-binding context.

Internet governance has up to this time largely been founded in technical principles and, increasingly, on the internet's functionality as a giant global marketplace. With the internet becoming increasingly central to many social and political institutions, an alternative foundation and conceptual framework for IG can be explored. It is the view of the IG Caucus that a rights-based framework will be appropriate for this purpose.

A rights-based IG shouldn't be seen as threatening, but rather rights provide a set of international standards and guiding principles that can help to inform complex policy decisions. It is pertinent to recollect that WSIS called for a people-centric information society, and a rights framework helps develop people-centric IG agenda and polices.

It is the Caucus' view that the IGF is the forum best suited to take up this task. This process should start at the IGF Hyderabad, where workshops on rights issues are being planned. These issues will also hopefully figure prominently in the main sessions. The IGC fully expects that these discussions will help the IGF work towards developing 'Rights and the Internet' as the over-arching theme of the IGF-4 in Egypt.