[Chapter-delegates] Alejandro's question and where does ISOC stand on meaning of Montevideo?

[Dave Burstein]

I asked for Lynn or Markus to explain to ISOC members and chapters what's
going on because I don't know despite following diligently. She signed the
Montevideo Declaration in our name and we need an explanation of what ISOC
signed on to. I'm not criticizing ISOC signing - my guess is it's a good
thing - but trying to understand what this means.

  The Montevideo Declaration, the speeches by Fadi of ICANN and other
leaders, and what I hear both publicly and privately are seriously confused
and sometimes contradictory. That's why I'm asking for clarity. This is
important stuff.

  Most dramatically, Fadi's comment "The Affirmation of Commitments needs
to change from being a contract between ICANN and the US Government, to a
contract between 'ICANN and you' seems to be an attempt to end the U.S.
(nominal, lightly exercised) control over ICANN. ISOC had a very strong
presence against such a change throughout last year and WCIT in Dubai.

   There is much more in Montevideo and ISOC leadership speeches that can
be understood in different ways. I'm organizing a webinar for Columbia
University a week from Tuesday on this subject (details below) and have
been in touch with several of the principal people. Most are being very coy
and several seem to me not to be sure themselves.

    Lynn, Markus - please help us understand what ISOC is doing here.

Dave Burstein

Topic: Is there a third way for the Internet?
Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Time: 12:00 pm, Eastern Standard Time (New York, GMT-05:00)
Meeting Number: 731 150 813
Meeting Password: (This meeting does not require a password.)

p.s. Since someone asked. I mentioned that in the discussions on the U.S.
State Department International Telecommunications Advisory Committee
(ITAC), with many senior people involved, there didn't seem much more
clarity than elsewhere. I mentioned that just to illustrate how little
information was accessible even to insiders. ITAC is open to everyone
incidentally, as affirmed by the department head testifying to Congress.
Because that's an important symbol of "multi-stakeholderism," over the last
year they have accepted everyone who asks to be included. U.S. citizenship
is not even required. Memberships means you will be buried in email - half
a dozen today - but included are all the main ITU documents and other
interesting stuff. At a meeting today, I pushed for the U.S. to put those
ITU documents

    If you want to join, email me offlist and I'll connect you.

Some of my related reporting
Terry Kramer's Remarkable Opening of the U.S. State Department

Multi-Stakeholder meaningless if stakeholders all corporate
By joining ITAC - free and open to all - you can be a meaningful part of
the process and have impact on U.S. policy. All the big tech companies -
Microsoft, Cisco, Google, AT&T, Verizon and two dozen more - use the ITAC
meetings and mailings to have a say. Over 100 independents are getting the
once secret documents of the ITU, regular briefings from Ambassador Terry
Kramer and top State officials (Dick Brainerd included) and questions
answered.

   With Kramer’s encouragement, I and Mike Masnick at Techdirt publicized
how to join and the response was remarkable. Three prominent professors, a
former board member of ICANN and many more signed up. ITU Secretary-General
Hamadoun Touré at Columbia pointed out ITAC as an ideal example of how
governments can get all ITU documents to their citizens.

   Terry’s likely to move on after December and the State Department staff
will take back control. These include the same people who a few years ago
set a firm U.S. opinion that civil society not play a role at ITU. Far too
often, I found myself in discussions where I was the only voice outside
government that was not corporate. With luck, the success of Kramer’s
actions has changed their opinions and they will stay effectively open
going forward.


 A Modest Proposal to Open ITU to All Civil Society

[image: A Modest Proposal 1729 Cover]Hamadoun Touré at Columbia made clear
he wants more involvement at ITU, but it's an international organization
that moves slowly. The Internet Society can easily speed things up if they
had the courage.
 I wrote to the ISOC list

Folks

    Allowing all ISOC members active in civil society to join the ISOC
delegation to WCIT and other ITU events would quickly and effectively
resolve the issue of limited civil society involvement. ITU members,
including ISOC, have total discretion about who is on their delegation.
Hamadoun Touré has actively encouraged members such as the U.S. to include
in their delegation civil society. Speaking to Touré, I believe he sees a
political advantage to expanding civil society.

   The U.S. delegation currently numbers 115. The Nigerians are sending 70.
ISOC only is sending 8. There's no reason not to expand the delegation.
Only a limited number of civil society representatives will have the money
and time. I'd bet we could include just about all of them and still have a
modest sized delegation.

   I suggest ISOC immediately put out word that "any civil society
representative who has been personally active supporting the causes of the
ISOC mission" is welcome to be included in the delegation. Current
non-members can simply and instantly join. Those active in ISOC like Veni,
Alejandro, and Joly would also be a strong addition..

   Of course it's more cumbersome to coordinate a larger mission. But it
establishes an important principle of how meetings like WCIT should be
inclusive. The main objection I foresse is "that's not the way we do
things." It could be.


http://netpolicynews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40&Itemid=124
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20131031/772a0c73/attachment.htm>