All posts tagged bestbits2012

Enhanced_cooperation_for_the_public_interest

Background papers:
– Background on the ITU and the WCIT
– Overview of the current model of Internet governance

Analyses of specific proposals:

ETNO interconnection proposals – longer paper and 2-page summary.

Cybersecurity proposals – longer paper and summary.

Proposals to make ITU-T technical standards mandatory – a paper and a shorter blog post.

We’ve also pulled together a list of commentary and analysis from experts around the world, available here.

Background paper on Fiji Internet Services by the Consumer Council of Fiji.

A Development Agenda in Internet Governance: Outlining Global Public Policy Issues and Exploring New Institutional Options is a discussion paper published by IT for Change in April 2012.

Contributions to discussion:

• Code of good practice on information, participation and transparency in internet governance
• Summary of the discussions held in the 2012 IGF LAC meeting in Bogota
• Final Statement of the Pan African Civil Society Workshop on Who Controls the Internet, July 2012: African Civil Society Conversation on Internet Governance
• Overview of United Nations Human Rights Council discussion on the internet and human rights

Who Governs the Internet? is a discussion paper published by Global Partners & Associates in June 2012.

Quarterlife Crisis of the Digital Revolution by Mark Cooper, Consumer Federation of America

Internet freedom in Indonesia by Donny B U, ICT Watch.

I have two background papers to contribute to Best Bits:

• My paper Online freedom of expression: edge cases and safety valves is to be published at this year’s IGF in the periodical MIND#4, and a pre-press version is also linked above. It explains how a multi-stakeholder policy development process is the only legitimate way in which to develop policy on trans-border policy issues such as those that arise online, but that social and technical “safety valves” are still also needed.
• My blog post Picking up where the IGF left off: our role in the future of Internet governance explains how the enhanced cooperation mandate will probably never be fulfilled in a way that addresses the unmet needs for global Internet governance policy development, due to inevitable fears of a governmental takeover of the Internet. Whilst ideally the IGF ought to take this role, this post proposes another option of a new body that would be fully voluntary for all participants, and would not be UN-linked.