[WSIS CS-Plenary] IG success/failure scenarios

Fri Jul 29 17:15:16 BST 2005

Hi Renate,

Thanks for the info.  I was told just last week that they'd reserved rooms
for 3+ October 17-21 in Geneva, but if the preference now is to save a
little money and hence create an 11th hour bargaining crisis on the eve of
the Summit, that should certainly make things interesting.  I hope all the
necessary hotel rooms are not booked up for the days prior or they could
really have a fiasco.  Hope also that not too many people have already paid
for plane tickets that would have them arriving too late.

Best,

Bill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org]On
> Behalf Of Renate Bloem
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 5:39 PM
> To: plenary at wsis-cs.org; 'Wolfgang Kleinwächter'
> Subject: RE: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IG success/failure scenarios
>
>
> Hi Bill, Wolfgang et al,
>
> According to the latest, there will probably be no 3+ or 3++, at least not
> in Geneva (there is also no budget for that) The thinking goes more into
> having something back to back in Tunis, if necessary. The pressure to
> resolve any open issues will not be enough in an event 3-4 weeks prior to
> the Summit, and therefore rather useless, as it was in the Geneva +3s (no
> advance in negotiations) Pressure builds up 24-48 hours before heads of
> State arrive. So we should take this into our considerations and planning.
>
> (These considerations can naturally be reversed by any decision or total
> catastrophe of PrepCom3)
>
> Renata
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> -
>
> Renate Bloem
> President of the Conference of NGOs (CONGO)
> 11, Avenue de la Paix
> CH-1202 Geneva
> Tel: +41 22 301 1000
> Fax: +41 22 301 2000
> E-mail: rbloem at ngocongo.org
> Website: www.ngocongo.org
>
>
>
> The Conference of NGOs (CONGO) is an international, membership association
> that facilitates the participation of NGOs in United Nations debates and
> decisions. Founded in 1948, CONGO's major objective is to ensure the
> presence of NGOs in exchanges among the world's governments and United
> Nations agencies on issues of global concern.  For more
> information see our
> website at www.ngocongo.org
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org]
> De la part
> de William Drake
> Envoyé : vendredi, 29. juillet 2005 11:03
> À : plenary at wsis-cs.org; Wolfgang Kleinwächter
> Objet : [WSIS CS-Plenary] IG success/failure scenarios
>
> [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list.
> Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for
> specific people.
> Your cooperation is highly appreciated]
> _______________________________________
>
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> Whether failure is the most likely scenario with respect to IG (I gather
> you're not addressing the other issues here) depends on exactly what you
> think would constitute failure or success.  If PC3 manages to
> close with at
> least an agreement for a closer and structured evaluation of the forum
> options, it may not be entirely impossible for PC 3+ to agree on the
> principle and maybe modalities for a smaller group to develop the details.
> There will only be three weeks left before Tunis when 3+ ends, and there
> could be a strong desire to get this off the table so they can address the
> non-IG items (or maybe that would move in reverse).
>
> On the other big IG issue of oversight, irrespective what the world might
> say, it is simply impossible to imagine the Bush people going to this
> Congress to try to sell any changes with respect to the zone file
> or ICANN,
> especially when there are a lot of powerful constituencies that don't see
> problems that can't be handled within existing framework, and when no
> detailed alternative frameworks have been proposed.  And bear in mind that
> some Congress critters are still thumping the tub over Oil for Food and
> Annan's son, etc; while none of this will go anywhere, the mood simply
> precludes an adult conversation about what would be framed as a
> potentially
> destabilizing "UN takeover" of critical infrastructure.  Getting agreement
> on the forum would be a major problem as it is, there's no way
> they add this
> into the pot.
>
> So would creation of a forum and agreement to keep talking about oversight
> there and elsewhere (and hopefully all the other issues pertaining to
> existing arrangements as well) constitute a failure, or a success?
>
> Best,
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org]On
> > Behalf Of Wolfgang Kleinwächter
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 6:18 PM
> > To: plenary at wsis-cs.org; plenary at wsis-cs.org
> > Subject: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [Wsis-pct] IPJ: US & Japan Upset
> > Consensus for Development Agenda at WIPO
> >
> >
> > And more will come. Looking forward, I see a great conflict
> > between G 20 + China and US on IG during PrepCom3, PrepCom3+ and
> > PrepCom3++ without any agreement in Tunis. My two scenarios for
> > Tunis are:
> > a. failure with a continuation of the discussion and
> > b. failure without a continuation of the discussion.
> > Too pessimistic?
> >
> > Best
> >
> > w
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > Von: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org im Auftrag von Rainer Kuhlen
> > Gesendet: Mi 27.07.2005 10:35
> > An: plenary at wsis-cs.org
> > Betreff: Re: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [Wsis-pct] IPJ: US & Japan
> > Upset Consensus for Development Agenda at WIPO
> >
> >
> >
> > [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the
> > entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses
> > intended for specific people. Your cooperation is highly appreciated]
> > _______________________________________
> >
> > good points Richards - it´s not only WIPO where the US try to block any
> > attempts to find alternative solutions to the commercialization of
> > knowledge and information. As some of you know, the UNESCO attempts to
> > pass the convention on cultural diversity on its next general conference
> > late in fall 2005. Althought the current text is already a rather
> > sterilized version, the US opposes it and tries the usual bi-lateral
> > strategy to convince other states not to agree to the convention. I
> > doubt whether it feasible to expel the US from international UN
> > organization, but the chances are there that they voluntarily will
> > retreat (as they have done from the UNESCO in th 80ies as protest
> > against the New World Information and Communication Order - by he way,
> > among the leading NWIKO supporters were the same nations, Brazil etc.,
> > which have initiated the WIPO development agenda) What can be learned
> > form all these lessons with respect to WSIS?
> > RK
> >
> > Richard M. Stallman schrieb:
> >
> > >[Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the
> > entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses
> > intended for specific people. Your cooperation is highly appreciated]
> > >_______________________________________
> > >
> > >The US attitude is probably that WIPO exists to do the empire's
> > >bidding and otherwise should do nothing at all.  It will probably
> > >prevent any work on the development agenda if it is approved.
> > >
> > >There are two possible ways to respond to this:
> > >
> > >1. The countries that promoted the development agenda should retaliate
> > >by simply blocking everything that the US wants WIPO to do.  That is a
> > >partial victory anyway.  WIPO has done primarily harm in the past, so
> > >if it does no further harm, that is better.
> > >
> > >2. Maybe they can vote to expel the US and Japan from WIPO.  The US
> > >under business-dominated rule will not sign any WIPO treaty unless it
> > >takes away rights from the citizens.  So if WIPO ever proposes a
> > >treaty that goes in the other direction, the US won't sign it anyway.
> > >Therefore, there's nothing to lose by expelling the US now?  It might
> > >then be possible to disavow the WIPO copyright treaty, so that it
> > >cannot be used as an excuse for US pressure to adopt laws like the
> > >DMCA.
> > >
> > >If this results in a decrease in funding for WIPO "technical
> > >assistance", that would be another step forward.  That "technical
> > >assistance" is structured to bribe patent officials lawfully, with
> > >foreign resort junkets, and train them to repeat megacorporate
> > >propaganda.
> > >
> > >Does the WIPO General Assembly also operate by consensus?
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Plenary mailing list
> > >Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> > >http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Prof. Dr. Rainer Kuhlen
> > UNESCO Chair of Communications
> > Department of Computer and Information Science - University of Konstanz
> > Box D 87
> > email: rainer.kuhlen at uni-konstanz.de
> > URL: http://www.kuhlen.name
> > Phone Univ.: *49 (0)7531 - 882879; Fax: *49 (0)7531 882048
> > Berlin: +49 (0)30 27594241; Fax: ...260
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Plenary mailing list
> > Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> > http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
>
>