[WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF ???

[mclauglm at po.muohio.edu]

[OK, Chris Z., I know the joke, and it does 
resonate, but...] this is a reasonable question. 
I'm getting the sense that post-WSIS legitimacy 
now is being defined by virtue of what, if 
anything, specific CS groups wish to contribute 
to the IGF. Joseph isn't the only one who's 
wondering what's going on. Perhaps CS should look 
at broadening its agenda instead of following the 
governmental one? The idea that CS was not 
allowed to participate fully in setting the 
agenda seems to mitigate against the notion that 
CS "has important, and almost equal, official 
status in the IGF," the latter of which 
represents a narrowing of the agenda since it's 
all about 1) the internet; and 2) the governance 
of the internet. I don't even know who "we" are, 
let alone where "we" are.

On the constructive side, perhaps there should be 
a resource center for listing post-WSIS 
activities and initiatives, one that reflects the 
broad issues with which the summit was originally 
approached by CS actors.

Best,

Lisa


>As a member of the CS-Plenary, and as a 
>participant of the February 16 and 17th meeting 
>in Geneva, I wonder were we are?
>
>Looking the last emails to this list, I think 
>that I'm loosing something or indeed many things.
>
>Could someone inform me (and in general may be us!) where we are?
>
>Thanks a lot!
>
>
>Josep Xercavins
>UBUNTU Forum
>
>
>De: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org 
>[mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org] En nom de 
>Parminder
>Enviat: dijous, 23 / març / 2006 17:10
>Per a: plenary at wsis-cs.org
>Tema: [SPAM] [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF theme 
>proposal: asserting the public-ness of the 
>Internet as a guiding principle for Internet 
>Governance
>
>
>
>I had made this posting a few days back to the 
>IG caucus, with CC to plenary list, but for some 
>strange reason it hasn't come on this list. So, 
>I am reposting (though with a few changes)
>
>Dear Friends,
>We wish to bring to your notice what we think is 
>an important issue regarding the future of the 
>Internet.
>The most important institutional gain from the 
>WSIS is the setting up of an Internet Governance 
>Forum (IGF) which is mandated to take up 
>important public policy issues relating to the 
>Internet. Even though it is not a negotiating or 
>decision making body, in the present context 
>wherein the governance of the Internet is 
>captured mostly by dominant interests, the IGF 
>becomes an important global policy space for 
>pushing progressive and pro-development agenda 
>in relation to the Internet.
>A noteworthy thing about the IGF is that civil 
>society has important, and almost equal, 
>official status in the IGF as governments and 
>the private sector. Therefore, if the IGF does 
>indeed evolve into an effective global policy 
>space, it can serve as an important global 
>governance innovation as well.
>We write this with concern over that fact that 
>progressive forces promoting the public domain, 
>communication rights, media rights etc do not 
>seem to be engaged with the possibilities of the 
>IG Forum sufficiently. And as the Internet 
>increasingly emerges as a main arena for these 
>issues, this lack of engagement can be 
>disastrous.
>The imperative NOW:
>IGF has called for submission of themes for its 
>first meeting. The way the substantive business 
>of the IGF takes off initially will in many ways 
>determine and delimit the scope of the IGF. 
>Civil society groups need to put forward 
>progressive themes early enough to be able to 
>define the substantive spaces within the IGF. 
>(Experiences in forums like WIPO for pushing 
>development agenda are instructive on how it is 
>necessary to capture thematic spaces early in 
>these global policy forums)
>We are especially concerned that with issues 
>like network neutrality already threatening the 
>Internet in very basic ways, (please see 
><http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4552138.stm>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4552138.stm 
>for one such report on how a multiple tiered 
>Internet with content, services and access 
>differentiated by ability to pay, and other 
>considerations, is already taking shape) there 
>is a need for the public and egalitarian nature 
>of the Internet to be asserted unequivocally as 
>a fundamental principle for global public 
>policies regarding the Internet.
>Why your participation in this process is URGENTLY REQUIRED
>Fostering the Internet's 'public' character- as 
>a principle and in its concrete policy 
>expressions is an urgent imperative. The 
>implications for policy span the three layers of 
>the Internet -  logical, content and physical 
>infrastructure - and the essential public and 
>egalitarian nature of the Internet concerns all 
>three layers. (Openness in Domain Name System 
>space pertains to the logical layer, network 
>neutrality and preserving the public domain 
>issues implicates the content layer, while 
>issues like open spectrum, 
>community/municipality wireless, wireless 
>commons etc concern the physical layer). The IG 
>Caucus  had invited themes for submission to the 
>IGF and from IT for Change we have made a 
>proposal on 'defining and fostering the public 
>nature of the Internet' to be submitted for 
>being taken up at the first meeting of the IGF. 
>We are of the view that this issue should get 
>wider support.
>If you feel that this is an important issue 
>which must be taken up by the IGF, please send 
>your endorsement to this proposal. The last date 
>for submissions is 31st March, and therefore 
>your endorsement should reach 
><mailto:Parminder at ITforChange.net>Parminder at ITforChange.net 
> by the 30th. In case you have further 
>clarifications, please write to us.  
>Thank you.
>Parminder
>
>Suggested theme for the first meeting of the 
>Internet Governance Forum: Defining and 
>fostering the 'public-ness' of the Internet - 
>issues of public interest, public domain, public 
>infrastructure and public good in the context of 
>the Internet.
>a.      A concise formulation for the proposed theme
>In determining global public policy issues and 
>directions for IG, it is important to first 
>define and characterize the Internet. Its 
>essential public and egalitarian nature must be 
>asserted as basic principles through open 
>discussions at the IGF. And these principles can 
>then be interpreted in terms of specific issues 
>that face us today - content issues (protecting 
>and promoting the public domain, network 
>neutrality) infrastructure issues (universal 
>access, public infrastructure, open spectrum, 
>Internet as public good), as well as many other 
>issues.
>b.     A brief description of why it is important
>The Internet, as understood by most of us, is 
>what it is basically because of its egalitarian 
>and public nature. It is important to articulate 
>these fundamentals of the Internet strongly, and 
>use them as the guiding principles to debate and 
>develop global public policies on IG. WSIS was 
>an arena that required quick resolutions for 
>consensus positions. This imperative did not 
>allow sufficient informed debates on developing 
>public policy principles for IG, including 
>characterizing the essential public and 
>egalitarian nature of Internet as the technology 
>that promises a 'better world for everyone'. IGF 
>is the right forum for initiating this process, 
>and taking it forward in a sustained manner. 
>Formulating these 'essentials' of the Internet, 
>and due exposition of their implications in 
>various contexts, will enable better global 
>policy responses to pressing issues including 
>network neutrality and universal access. If 
>these essential principles that define the 
>Internet are not discussed and settled urgently, 
>the Internet is likely to disintegrate, along 
>both political and economic lines. Even if it is 
>going to be a difficult and protracted process, 
>discussing and resolving this is essential and 
>the IGF is the right forum to initiate it.
>c.   How it is in conformity with the Tunis 
>Agenda of the World Summit on the Information 
>Society (WSIS)
>The WSIS Declaration of Principles assert "Š Š 
>our common desire and commitment to build a 
>people-centred, inclusive and 
>development-oriented Information Society, where 
>everyone can create, access, utilize and share 
>information and knowledge, enabling individuals, 
>communities and peoples to achieve their full 
>potential in promoting their sustainable 
>development and improving their quality of 
>lifeŠŠ ".
>The earlier mentioned issues of characterizing 
>the global resource of the Internet fall within 
>these overall ideals agreed at the WSIS. Para 31 
>of the Tunis Agenda declares
>"We recognise that Internet governance, carried 
>out according to the Geneva principles, is an 
>essential element for a people-centred, 
>inclusive, development oriented and 
>non-discriminatory Information Society."
>d.     How it fits within the mandate of the IGF as detailed in para 72;
>Discussion on the stated issue is important in 
>order to develop guiding principles for laying 
>down a public policy framework on IG.
>(72 a of Tunis Agenda: Discuss public policy 
>issues related to key elements of Internet 
>Governance in order to foster the 
>sustainability, robustness, security, stability 
>and development of the Internet;)
>Such discussions will lay the guiding principles 
>for, and help clarify, possible policy responses 
>to important emerging issues of network 
>neutrality, public internet infrastructure, 
>spectrum de-licensing etc.
>(72 g: Identify emerging issues, bring them to 
>the attention of the relevant bodies and the 
>general public, and, where appropriate, make 
>recommendations;)
>And most importantly, it puts IG discussions in 
>the context of the broad guiding principles 
>adopted at Geneva, and later in Tunis.
>(72 i: Promote and assess, on an ongoing basis, 
>the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet 
>Governance processes;)
>e.      Who the main actors in the field are, 
>who could be encouraged to participate in the 
>thematic session
>All stakeholders - from governments, civil 
>society, business and multi-lateral 
>organizations to those organizations currently 
>involved with IG, like the ICANN, have an 
>important role in discussing these issues. 
>However, more stress needs to be placed on the 
>inclusion of representation from developing 
>countries and (2) the development community 
>without core ICT backgrounds. 
>f.       Last but not least, why should this 
>issue should be addressed in the first annual 
>meeting of the Forum rather than in subsequent 
>ones.
>The first phase of Internet development was 
>driven purely by enterprise and innovation, and 
>in many ways by private sector leadership, which 
>served us well. Internet grew mostly autonomous 
>of public policy in this phase.
>But now with the power of Internet firmly 
>established, and its economic and political 
>threat to many entrenched interests increasingly 
>obvious, we are into an important phase of 
>development of the Internet where its 
>egalitarian and public nature is increasingly 
>under threat. To stem this trend and 
>possibility, global public policy response in 
>the form of clearly establishing the public and 
>egalitarian nature of the Internet, and laying 
>out its policy consequences, needs to come in 
>urgently.
>In the absence of this, it may soon be too late 
>to reclaim the promise of the Internet for 
>developing a "people-centred and development 
>oriented information society" as envisioned by 
>the WSIS. As a commentator recently said in the 
>context of the issue of 'network neutrality', if 
>urgent policy action is not taken, the situation 
>may soon become intractable, and it will then be 
>like trying to push the 'genie back into the 
>bottle'.
>________________________________________________
>Parminder Jeet Singh
>IT for Change
>Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
>91-80-26654134
>www.ITforChange.net
><hr size=2 width=500 style='width:375.0pt' align=left>


-- 
Lisa McLaughlin, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Mass Communication & Women's Studies
Editor, Feminist Media Studies
Director of Graduate Studies, M.A. Program in Mass Communication

Mass Communication
Williams Hall
Miami University-Ohio
Oxford, OH 45056
USA
Tele: +1 513-529-3547
Fax: +1 513-529-1835