0:00:01.788,0:00:04.639
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I would like to welcome everybody to the Dynamic

0:00:04.639,0:00:07.575
Coalition on Internet values. We do have one or two panelists that

0:00:07.575,0:00:11.734
are actually going to join us a little bit late. Dr. Cerf should be here in

0:00:11.734,0:00:17.218
about 30 minutes or so. And I know we have some remote participants as

0:00:17.218,0:00:21.534
well. So just two or three minutes on this particular Dynamic

0:00:21.534,0:00:25.242
Coalition and its history, and then we will ask the panelists to

0:00:25.242,0:00:27.925
introduce themselves and respond to a question which I will actually

0:00:27.925,0:00:30.522
pose in a moment .

0:00:31.864,0:00:34.225
But this particular Dynamic Coalition came out of a workshop on the

0:00:34.225,0:00:37.315
fundamentals, particularly around the Core Internet Values, which was

0:00:37.315,0:00:43.185
held back in 2009 in Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt. And then following

0:00:43.185,0:00:46.977
that workshop a Dynamic Coalition was established and there have been

0:00:46.977,0:00:53.836
two other presentations since that time, one at the IGF in Vilnius and

0:00:53.836,0:00:58.034
another at the IGF in Nairobi.

0:00:58.340,0:01:02.109
This is the third meeting of the Dynamic Coalition, and one of the

0:01:02.109,0:01:06.059
things we want to come out of this meeting with is really trying to be

0:01:06.059,0:01:10.287
quite concrete about some next steps and some work. The purposes of

0:01:10.287,0:01:13.449
the Dynamic Coalition are to actually do work between meetings.

0:01:13.449,0:01:18.558
Largely remotely. There's an awful lot of work being done on Core

0:01:18.558,0:01:22.537
Internet Values in various parts of Internet ecosystem. But I think

0:01:22.537,0:01:25.255
we'd like to try to define whether or not there's something specific

0:01:25.255,0:01:30.220
we want to do here, particularly in the multistakeholder format.

0:01:31.033,0:01:36.308
So the Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values was actually

0:01:36.308,0:01:43.117
organized to debate questions such as what makes the Internet what it is?

0:01:43.117,0:01:46.179
What are its architectural principles? What are some of its core

0:01:46.179,0:01:48.587
principles and values and what's happening to them in the process of

0:01:48.587,0:01:50.753
Internet's evolution?

0:01:51.466,0:01:56.119
So specifically, when we talk about core values and principles, the

0:01:56.119,0:01:58.781
things we often quote are openness, transparency, collaborative

0:01:58.781,0:02:09.270
processes, bottom up, local processes such as that embodied in the RIR

0:02:09.270,0:02:15.082
process and, of course, the distributed nature which is central to how

0:02:15.082,0:02:19.902
a lot of the work actually gets done across the Internet ecosystem.

0:02:20.566,0:02:24.879
So over time, some of those principles and values have been

0:02:24.879,0:02:33.154
threatened, I guess, sometimes, you know, perhaps less intentionally

0:02:33.154,0:02:37.784
in terms of trying to address or solve some problem without clear

0:02:37.784,0:02:41.387
understanding of the impact it actually has on the Internet, other

0:02:41.387,0:02:46.400
times we could probably ascribe more intent to some of those actions.

0:02:46.962,0:02:50.151
Before I do that I want to ask each one of the panelists to take a

0:02:50.151,0:02:52.428
moment to introduce themselves. In particular, I would like a quick

0:02:52.428,0:02:57.630
reflection on whether or not they think the Internet principles are

0:02:57.630,0:03:01.934
alive and well. Are they thriving or are they under some level of

0:03:01.934,0:03:09.453
threat for lack of a better word? So I will turn to my right and I'd

0:03:09.453,0:03:12.422
actually like to thank Siva as well. Because Siva was actually the

0:03:12.422,0:03:16.533
driver and the instigator behind the very first workshop, and has been

0:03:16.533,0:03:21.555
central to the other two and was very central and the driving force

0:03:21.555,0:03:25.086
behind this particular workshop. So it's really to Siva that we

0:03:25.086,0:03:27.749
actually owe all of us being here today.

0:03:28.318,0:03:35.062
One final comment, while I am with the Internet Society and a number

0:03:35.062,0:03:38.377
of the people on this panel here are Internet Society members, this is

0:03:38.377,0:03:43.177
not an Internet Society workshop, panel, or Dynamic Coalition. The

0:03:43.177,0:03:47.748
Dynamic Coalitions are definded by having members from a minimum of

0:03:47.748,0:03:53.445
three different multistakeholder communities. So if I say 'we', I am

0:03:53.445,0:03:57.763
doing my best to say that 'we' in the context of what we are here as a

0:03:57.763,0:04:02.065
Dynamic Coalition, not specific to an ISOC set of activities or an

0:04:02.065,0:04:07.844
ISOC kind of ownership, if you will for this paticular idea. We all

0:04:07.844,0:04:10.978
own the Core Internet Values. So Siva?

0:04:11.801,0:04:21.569
>> SIVASUBRAMANIAN MUTHUSAMY: Thank you, Lynn. I'm Sivasubramanian, I

0:04:21.569,0:04:25.870
serve as the president of Internet Society India Chennai, which is

0:04:25.870,0:04:33.066
also an ICANN At-Large Structure. I'm from India and that's in brief

0:04:33.066,0:04:39.104
about me and responding to the question by Lynn, I think Internet core

0:04:39.104,0:04:43.636
values are under a serious threat and a lot of things that are

0:04:43.636,0:04:48.497
happening all around us, a lot of changes, a lot of regulations that

0:04:48.497,0:04:55.416
are proposed, a lot of legislations underway - they seek to threaten,

0:04:55.416,0:04:58.834
to alter the core values considerably.

0:04:59.480,0:05:05.684
And in my opinion, a lot of these changes are happening quite

0:05:05.684,0:05:10.962
unintentionally. It's not that governments want to alter core values

0:05:10.962,0:05:17.067
intentionally, it is just that Internet is new to us and Internet is

0:05:17.067,0:05:22.883
new to governments and there are several departments handling

0:05:22.883,0:05:28.384
Internet. For example, in Germany, at least six different ministries

0:05:28.384,0:05:35.363
deal with different policy functions related to Internet, and then

0:05:35.363,0:05:39.246
France, there are roughly three ministries that handle different

0:05:39.246,0:05:44.132
policy aspects of Internet and there are often not sufficient

0:05:44.132,0:05:47.463
coordination between these ministries and it so happens that sometimes

0:05:47.463,0:05:54.029
somebody in some department who does not quite sufficiently understand

0:05:54.029,0:05:59.251
how Internet works tends to make some policy changes, some policy

0:05:59.251,0:06:04.887
proposals, that end up being very, very harmful to the Internet and

0:06:04.887,0:06:06.965
its core values.

0:06:07.532,0:06:11.376
For example, we know that the government of India has been very, very

0:06:11.376,0:06:16.633
positive, and the minister from India was here at this IGF - Minister

0:06:16.633,0:06:23.121
Kapil Sibal - and he has understood Internet and he's understood how

0:06:23.121,0:06:27.395
Internet Governance works and he has been very positive and was even

0:06:27.395,0:06:33.378
saying that the term Internet Governance itself is an oxymoron and he

0:06:33.378,0:06:36.835
was talking about Internet accountability and to that extent he was

0:06:36.835,0:06:40.578
positive. He was reaching out.

0:06:40.945,0:06:44.034
At the same time, somewhere else -- from somewhere else in India, a

0:06:44.034,0:06:52.946
proposal was filed at the ITU that was very bad. I don't want to use

0:06:52.946,0:06:55.943
a different language. I would simply say that the proposal was very,

0:06:55.943,0:07:02.832
very bad. This is one example of how the lack of coordination between

0:07:02.832,0:07:06.530
government departments give rise to some proposals that invariably

0:07:06.530,0:07:16.462
end up threaten the Core Internet Values. So what the core values

0:07:16.462,0:07:24.529
coalition and what the Internet institutions could do is to make sure

0:07:24.529,0:07:30.347
that every corner of the policy making sphere understands how the

0:07:30.347,0:07:34.655
Internet works. Once there's sufficient understanding of how the

0:07:34.655,0:07:38.838
Internet works and how it has to evolve, I think most of the policies

0:07:38.838,0:07:41.876
will be in the proper direction. Thank you.

0:07:42.549,0:07:48.010
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you Siva, that was very very clear. I'm just

0:07:48.010,0:07:50.835
going to go direct through the panelists, because I really do want an

0:07:50.835,0:07:53.926
exchange amongst the panelists and to invite the remote participation,

0:07:53.926,0:07:56.958
and obviously the individuals here in the room as well. So the

0:07:56.958,0:08:00.780
purpose of this runthrough was just to get a broad perspective of

0:08:00.780,0:08:03.722
views. Sébastien Bachollet?

0:08:04.460,0:08:10.690
>> SÉBASTIEN BACHOLLET: Thank you, Lynn, and thank you, Siva for

0:08:10.690,0:08:19.758
organizing and supporting this Dynamic Coalition since its inception.

0:08:19.758,0:08:27.770
I'm a member of ISOC and I am board member of ICANN. But I am not

0:08:27.770,0:08:31.508
talking on behalf of any of those organizations.

0:08:32.112,0:08:37.655
I want to follow what Siva just explained and push just a little bit

0:08:37.655,0:08:44.807
further. It seems that in a lot of countries, whatever the type of

0:08:44.807,0:08:50.692
political organization, democratic or not totally democratic, or not

0:08:50.692,0:08:56.439
democratic at all, we end up with the same type of decision to make a

0:08:56.439,0:09:02.689
law each time we have trouble with something that happened once on

0:09:02.689,0:09:12.136
Internet. And we end up to add law to law to law, and, in fact, the

0:09:12.136,0:09:18.253
situation will be better handled by the private sector, the civil

0:09:18.253,0:09:29.736
society and in discussion, in finding some consensus discussion, and

0:09:29.736,0:09:39.443
the fact that it's very often ending in the parliament where people

0:09:39.443,0:09:44.674
are really not aware of what is happening. They take bad decision and

0:09:44.674,0:09:51.825
then it's one element to threaten more the Internet as we knew it and

0:09:51.825,0:09:54.906
as we would like to have it in the future. Thank you.

0:09:55.576,0:10:02.675
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Sébastien. Paul Wilson?

0:10:03.386,0:10:09.444
>> PAUL WILSON: Hi. I'm from the organization APNIC, the Regional

0:10:09.444,0:10:12.509
Internet Address Registry for the Asia-Pacific. So we're a member of the

0:10:12.509,0:10:18.577
technical community, and have been for coming up to 20 years. We

0:10:18.577,0:10:23.408
operate as a nonprofit, mutual community organization that has got

0:10:23.408,0:10:28.686
this particular technical responsibility of managing IP addresses. And

0:10:28.686,0:10:32.751
I guess because we are a predominantly technical organization, we have

0:10:32.751,0:10:36.283
taken a fairly pragmatic and practical view of what we do. We know

0:10:36.283,0:10:41.274
well what we have to do and we know technically how to do it and

0:10:41.274,0:10:45.254
probably haven't spoken so much about the values, the vision of the

0:10:45.254,0:10:47.217
values behind what we do.

0:10:47.925,0:10:51.441
But I think, as years have gone by and particularly as we get into

0:10:51.441,0:10:57.108
this much more complex world, that I think the IGF exemplifies, it's

0:10:57.108,0:11:00.693
become more and more important to talk about our values, to have

0:11:00.693,0:11:03.773
people understand what we as an organization are and I think it's --

0:11:03.773,0:11:09.771
it can be said fairly reliably -- that movements and organizations

0:11:09.771,0:11:13.486
that actually have values and vision to express are generally more

0:11:13.486,0:11:18.709
successful than those that go from day to day on a -- just knowing

0:11:18.709,0:11:21.890
simply what they do and how they do it.

0:11:22.624,0:11:25.703
So we have been spending a bit of time on this, and I think the same

0:11:25.703,0:11:31.584
thing I described actually goes to the Internet itself, that the idea

0:11:31.584,0:11:36.803
of having identified, some identified vision and a set of values for

0:11:36.803,0:11:42.589
the Internet gives us a very good, a very good idea, if down the track

0:11:42.589,0:11:46.657
the Internet were to change, I mean, and that's what we are talking

0:11:46.657,0:11:49.404
about here. We are talking about the way the Internet might evolve in

0:11:49.404,0:11:53.541
future. I think of whatever network we are using in the future, it's

0:11:53.541,0:11:56.470
going to be an IP-based network and we will call it the Internet but

0:11:56.470,0:11:59.766
how would we know if the Internet 10 or 15 years down the track has

0:11:59.766,0:12:04.550
become a different Internet from the one we enjoy today. It may not

0:12:04.550,0:12:08.866
be so easy to tell, but it certainly helps if we have an idea of the

0:12:08.866,0:12:12.314
values that are being supported and a vision of the Internet and how

0:12:12.314,0:12:17.900
it is really intended by a consensus of us to operate.

0:12:18.562,0:12:25.065
I think to -- the question that Lynn asked is whether the principles

0:12:25.065,0:12:29.957
of the Internet, which I think we do need to enumerate, whether those

0:12:29.957,0:12:32.711
principles are here with us today, and I actually think they are. I

0:12:32.711,0:12:36.357
think the only reason why the Internet has been -- absolutely the only

0:12:36.357,0:12:40.212
reason why the Internet has been so successful is because of values

0:12:40.212,0:12:44.520
that are either implicit or explicit in the way it's been envisaged

0:12:44.520,0:12:48.448
and the way it's run, and the Internet today is still thriving. The

0:12:48.448,0:12:53.497
Internet growth is phenomenal. The growth of applications, of content,

0:12:53.497,0:12:56.960
of usage and of the user base of the Internet is phenomenal. So

0:12:56.960,0:13:00.178
today, today we are doing well. The question is whether tomorrow the

0:13:00.178,0:13:05.334
Internet or as I said 10 or 15 years down the track the Internet might

0:13:05.334,0:13:10.650
be on a path towards change that does damage those values and the

0:13:10.650,0:13:12.728
success.

0:13:13.463,0:13:18.050
So the values are things like the Internet as a single global

0:13:18.050,0:13:20.917
accessible network that links every point of the Internet to every

0:13:20.917,0:13:25.147
other point. The fact that it's a neutral network, where the actual

0:13:25.147,0:13:32.175
infrastructure of the Internet, the Internet itself is separate from

0:13:32.175,0:13:35.795
and can be separated from the applications and the content that run

0:13:35.795,0:13:39.908
across it, whether the Internet continues to be open and accessible.

0:13:39.908,0:13:45.284
These actually are -- these are values that I think we all actually

0:13:45.284,0:13:48.399
understand these days and they are -- they are critical values. They

0:13:48.399,0:13:51.766
are values which have been actually delivered to us and they have been

0:13:51.766,0:13:55.065
enabled by the -- both the original design of the Internet and the way

0:13:55.065,0:13:59.011
that it has been maintained.

0:13:59.351,0:14:03.293
I mean, we tend to take these things for granted. As I said, the

0:14:03.293,0:14:05.264
Internet is the Internet, and we just sort of think we know what it

0:14:05.264,0:14:08.459
is. But in fact those things have not been delivered automatically or

0:14:08.459,0:14:15.264
sort of magically by the Internet, they have been designed and they've been maintained. So there

0:14:15.264,0:14:19.402
are numerous ways in which those values may or may not be served by

0:14:19.402,0:14:21.197
developments.

0:14:21.737,0:14:25.851
Over time, we might see a sort of fragmentation of the Internet down

0:14:25.851,0:14:29.677
the track, and an increase in the complexity of the Internet down the

0:14:29.677,0:14:32.654
track, where you have fragments of the Internet which have more

0:14:32.654,0:14:39.007
complex interconnections between them than exist today. That could

0:14:39.007,0:14:43.621
happen. That could be a result, for instance, of a failure over the

0:14:43.621,0:14:47.821
next 10 years of IPv6 to be deployed, so at a technical level you get

0:14:47.821,0:14:51.679
a fragmentation and a breakdown of the global nature of the Internet.

0:14:51.679,0:14:59.885
It could also happen by political policies -- by policies, regulations being

0:14:59.885,0:15:02.940
adopted that actually start to break the Internet up.

0:15:03.365,0:15:08.089
The neutrality of the Internet, likewise, is something that could be

0:15:08.089,0:15:11.851
threatened by various different factors, whether it's commercial

0:15:11.851,0:15:16.253
decision making that becomes predominant and unregulated, whether it's

0:15:16.253,0:15:20.919
other governmental or regulatory actions. I mean, the interesting

0:15:20.919,0:15:23.892
thing about network neutrality is that the term didn't exist before

0:15:23.892,0:15:29.221
the Internet at all. The term -- prior to the Internet, there was no

0:15:29.221,0:15:31.934
such thing as a neutral network, because a network was provided by a

0:15:31.934,0:15:35.403
telecoms carrier that bundled the transportation and the applications

0:15:35.403,0:15:41.852
and everything you did into a stack of services and it was never

0:15:41.852,0:15:46.650
neutral. It couldn't be neutral. So network neutrality, the ability

0:15:46.650,0:15:49.182
to have a debate about network neutrality, no matter what your

0:15:49.182,0:15:54.640
position on it is -- the privilege we have of having a debate about it is

0:15:54.640,0:15:57.590
something that the Internet has delivered to us. And, once again,

0:15:57.590,0:16:01.876
that is something that could be eroded and disappear so that we find

0:16:01.876,0:16:05.220
ourselves technically unable, or for other reasons unable, to deliver

0:16:05.220,0:16:08.822
a network that's neutral in the same way that the Internet is today,

0:16:08.822,0:16:12.758
and that debate then becomes a thing of the past.

0:16:13.053,0:16:18.019
So there's many aspects of this and I won't go on hogging the

0:16:18.019,0:16:22.853
microphone, but I think the -- the Internet is thriving. The values

0:16:22.853,0:16:26.809
are still with us. I think there are -- there are all sorts of

0:16:26.809,0:16:31.510
circumstances, call them threats or inadvertent circumstances that

0:16:31.510,0:16:33.978
might change or threaten the values that we have and I think it's

0:16:33.978,0:16:41.010
really useful in this forum to be able to actually talk about them,

0:16:41.010,0:16:43.923
identify them and help to understand how we would recognize if they

0:16:43.923,0:16:46.714
disappeared or how we might help to avoid that from happening.

0:16:46.714,0:16:48.399
Thanks.

0:16:49.194,0:16:54.158
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Paul, and that was actually a nice level

0:16:54.158,0:16:57.784
and a nice thorough, sort of exposé of some of the Internet values. I

0:16:57.784,0:17:01.893
actually can't see what the name tag says right to your immediate left

0:17:01.893,0:17:07.594
and if it says -- okay, Désirée. Désirée was actually a tentative,

0:17:07.594,0:17:11.298
and apologies on some of the flux on the panel here. There are a

0:17:11.298,0:17:13.697
number of other workshops that are schedules in parallel and people

0:17:13.697,0:17:18.703
are fighting over resources. Correct Olivier? So let's move to

0:17:18.703,0:17:21.109
Alejandro.

0:17:21.793,0:17:29.918
>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: Thank you Lynn. My name is Alejandro Pisanty, I

0:17:29.918,0:17:33.986
am the chair of ISOC Mexico and a professor at the National University

0:17:33.986,0:17:41.553
of Mexico. I'm not speaking on behalf of the University, and I'm very

0:17:41.553,0:17:45.883
tentatively speaking on behalf of the chapter because this is work

0:17:45.883,0:17:47.339
that will go back there.

0:17:47.724,0:17:52.652
First, I want to join Lynn in embracing, enormously, the efforts of

0:17:52.652,0:17:57.421
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy. He has kept the continuity of the effort in

0:17:57.421,0:18:01.339
times that were of duress for many others of us and I'm enormously

0:18:01.339,0:18:09.632
thankful and in recognition of what you have enabled us to achieve and

0:18:09.632,0:18:17.564
achieved yourself. We really have a great debt of gratitude to you.

0:18:17.564,0:18:22.251
It's hard to improve on what Paul Wilson has already said. I think

0:18:22.251,0:18:27.866
that there's something to add, which is that these threats -- the

0:18:27.866,0:18:34.165
threats that I see are very concrete. They are pervasive, they are of

0:18:34.165,0:18:39.236
a permanent nature, and they are of a recurring nature. It's not only

0:18:39.236,0:18:43.917
that some actors or some involuntary circumstances will continue to

0:18:43.917,0:18:48.767
present, it's also that new actors and circumstances will continue to

0:18:48.767,0:18:56.698
present. We can only not foresee when and how strongly a company will

0:18:56.698,0:19:00.677
do something, including lobbying a government for legislation that

0:19:00.677,0:19:06.852
actually interferes with network neutrality. That's one of the most

0:19:06.852,0:19:10.267
visible threats right now. That will interfere with the end-to-end

0:19:10.267,0:19:14.863
principle, or other of the technical principles. We don't know whether an

0:19:14.863,0:19:19.138
apps developer will come up with something that becomes very popular

0:19:19.138,0:19:24.511
and will actually breaking the openness and interoperability to which we

0:19:24.511,0:19:29.471
have become used to. I think we have also become used to see the

0:19:29.471,0:19:35.305
threats coming and we should be warned about them. That's my

0:19:35.305,0:19:38.923
assessment about this general -- let's say, at the more technical

0:19:38.923,0:19:43.968
level of the core principles and certainly the principles of

0:19:43.968,0:19:52.583
collaboration, decentralization, the whole multistakeholder setup are

0:19:52.583,0:19:56.886
also continuously both being built up and being threatened. When I

0:19:56.886,0:20:01.390
see this kind of circumstance, my reflex now is to think of performing

0:20:01.390,0:20:05.547
a risk assessment, which has to be very objective. It includes

0:20:05.547,0:20:11.618
strengths and weaknesses. It includes threats that are very

0:20:11.618,0:20:15.110
improbable, very unlikely but would be of very high impact, and

0:20:15.110,0:20:19.465
includes classifying the threats by their impact and probability

0:20:19.465,0:20:24.950
therefore, and to try to make a rational, assessment. I think there is

0:20:24.950,0:20:31.310
an important space to do this in the format of a Dynamic Coalition, or

0:20:31.310,0:20:35.477
a similar one, in the sense that many organizations that come together

0:20:35.477,0:20:40.277
in different fora are able to perform some parts of this and we are

0:20:40.277,0:20:47.400
able to crowdsource and bring in a more popular and open participation

0:20:47.400,0:20:50.228
to these by individuals, small companies, small consultancies,

0:20:50.228,0:20:54.912
government units, the whole multistakeholder gamut and that would be

0:20:54.912,0:21:01.843
one possible task to perform that would grow on the competencies and

0:21:01.843,0:21:04.857
strengths of the existing organizations and would add a lot more to

0:21:04.857,0:21:06.127
the mix.

0:21:07.710,0:21:11.432
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Alejandro, excellent as ever and

0:21:11.432,0:21:16.178
thankyou for repeating the thanks to Siva as well. Nick, I want to

0:21:16.178,0:21:18.425
make sure that you really feel like you are a part of the panel and

0:21:18.425,0:21:21.449
not sort of falling off the table there. So, if we need to move down a

0:21:21.449,0:21:26.307
little bit, we'll scoot down. But please introduce

0:21:26.307,0:21:29.707
yourself and give us your thoughts on the Internet values.

0:21:30.379,0:21:33.053
>> NICK ASHTON-HART: Sure. Thank you very much Lynn and my thanks

0:21:33.053,0:21:37.259
also to Siva for keeping the flame alight when there weren't many

0:21:37.259,0:21:42.171
others to carry it and I'm glad to be here today. I'm Nick Ashton-

0:21:42.171,0:21:46.289
Hart, I'm the Geneva Representative of the Computer & Communications

0:21:46.289,0:21:52.337
Industry Association -- which has the privilege and the burden of

0:21:52.337,0:21:56.252
being the only technology industry association that has a permanent

0:21:56.252,0:22:04.160
presence in Geneva. So I get to watch the sometimes painful way in

0:22:04.160,0:22:09.673
which struggles over the identity of the Internet play out in

0:22:09.673,0:22:14.456
different aspects of international policy, be they at the ITU, or in

0:22:14.456,0:22:19.039
the World Trade Organization, where there are negotiations on

0:22:19.039,0:22:22.666
liberalizing services and in recognition that the openness of the

0:22:22.666,0:22:25.884
Internet is of key economic importance to the future, interestingly

0:22:25.884,0:22:27.436
enough.

0:22:28.039,0:22:32.371
And there is -- I think there are values to the Internet, there's no

0:22:32.371,0:22:37.940
question. The application of those values, I think is the difficult

0:22:37.940,0:22:43.557
part. If you think of the Internet as a general purpose technology

0:22:43.557,0:22:46.307
that affects everything, not just some things, the last, I think --

0:22:46.307,0:22:55.118
probably the best example was the development of the steam engine in

0:22:55.118,0:23:01.721
the 1800s. And if you think about that, before the steam engine came

0:23:01.721,0:23:07.233
about, time was not synchronized. Every village in England had

0:23:07.233,0:23:14.207
different time. The reason they had to create a common time was

0:23:14.207,0:23:18.270
because of railway schedules. Railways which were made possible by

0:23:18.270,0:23:19.385
the steam engine.

0:23:20.052,0:23:22.240
People literally traveled by horses, and it took so long to travel

0:23:22.240,0:23:26.275
between points you didn't need to have common time. And so you think

0:23:26.275,0:23:29.741
of the total transformation in life of just changing from having

0:23:29.741,0:23:35.313
village time to national time. And I think this is what the Internet

0:23:35.313,0:23:40.066
is doing to the modern world. It's completely transforming everything

0:23:40.103,0:23:45.859
about it, and not everyone wants to be transformed. Not everyone

0:23:45.859,0:23:49.245
wants to see the same videos. Not everyone wants their nationals to

0:23:49.245,0:23:50.852
see the same information.

0:23:51.174,0:23:58.820
Human rights are recognized in pretty much every country but we would

0:23:58.820,0:24:04.537
not recognize the application of those rights in many countries as being congruent with our

0:24:04.537,0:24:07.471
concept of what those rights mean.

0:24:07.732,0:24:12.252
And so I think the challenge is going to be to recognize that we need

0:24:12.252,0:24:16.321
to have common understandings of the architecture of the Internet, and

0:24:16.321,0:24:19.636
of its core characteristics which must be respected in order for it to

0:24:19.636,0:24:24.681
be used for any purpose. While living with the fact that at times the

0:24:24.681,0:24:29.750
application of norms, social norms to what people use the Internet for

0:24:29.750,0:24:36.460
will vary widely, and there are societies which are not willing to

0:24:36.460,0:24:42.321
accept a globalized concept of the individual at the same pace as

0:24:42.321,0:24:47.317
others. Whether we like that or not, I think we are going to have to

0:24:47.317,0:24:50.998
-- to recognize that people, different cultures, have a right to

0:24:50.998,0:24:57.320
define their norms slightly differently even if we disagree with them.

0:24:57.320,0:25:02.019
Because otherwise we will see the internet becoming balkanized, we will

0:25:02.019,0:25:06.658
see private country networks like we are seeing in Iran and the like.

0:25:06.658,0:25:12.390
And then we are all lessened by the result. I suspect that's a

0:25:12.390,0:25:20.374
controversial conception. But I see -- at the moment, I see the way in

0:25:20.374,0:25:24.457
which content is perceived and the way in which the network is being

0:25:24.457,0:25:29.656
perceived as being conflated together. And the result is, it's easier

0:25:29.656,0:25:34.308
for countries to say let's just turn off the connection, let's just create

0:25:34.308,0:25:39.817
a firewall and attempt to remove what we don't like. It's not very

0:25:39.817,0:25:43.388
successful doing that, as we've seen, because people in China find a

0:25:43.388,0:25:48.533
way around that, freedom finds a way, and speech finds a way. But I

0:25:48.533,0:25:52.240
think this is going to be a key challenge is -- is those countries

0:25:52.240,0:25:59.344
which socially even have a consensus that say this is not something we

0:25:59.344,0:26:05.346
are willing socially to see, or read, or hear. How are they to be able

0:26:05.346,0:26:09.616
to feel comfortable with the globalized parts of the Internet that do

0:26:09.616,0:26:12.546
work for them and for everyone else?

0:26:12.931,0:26:17.380
This is going I think to be a key policy challenge, and an

0:26:17.380,0:26:20.440
uncomfortable one for all of us who would like to see the

0:26:20.440,0:26:26.646
democratizing, and levelling, characteristics of the Internet carried

0:26:26.646,0:26:30.560
to every corner. It may take a little longer for that vision to

0:26:30.560,0:26:34.891
become -- to become reality than we would like.

0:26:35.600,0:26:41.140
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Nick. I want to kind of moderate this

0:26:41.140,0:26:45.295
in quite a light way. So I am going to first ask the panelists if

0:26:45.295,0:26:49.299
anybody wants to react to Nick's comments. I think he was trying to

0:26:49.299,0:26:53.943
elicit a response or a reaction there. Second, to ask if there's any

0:26:53.943,0:26:58.477
other discussion the panelists would like amongst themselves, and I'm

0:26:58.477,0:27:02.600
looking to see if this any a remote participation or questions from

0:27:02.600,0:27:07.331
the audience. And I do see there's one back there. While we actually

0:27:07.331,0:27:12.711
get a mic, could I see if there's anybody who wants to take up Nick's

0:27:12.711,0:27:17.456
challenge on what he thought was a somewhat controversial statement?

0:27:18.078,0:27:24.745
>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I'd rather see the audience.

0:27:25.278,0:27:28.790
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Sébastien actually wants.

0:27:29.722,0:27:36.808
>> SÉBASTIEN BACHOLLET: Thank you. Yeah, to what Nick just expressed,

0:27:36.808,0:27:41.724
I fully agree with him, but I am not sure if it's just the case of the

0:27:41.724,0:27:47.708
democratic or not democratic country, it's also happening in the

0:27:47.708,0:27:56.310
democratic country where there are -- decisions that are part of

0:27:56.310,0:28:03.711
publications can't be on the internet, and that the open Internet,

0:28:03.711,0:28:12.669
it's not anymore open, and when you have difficulty to -- to access to

0:28:12.669,0:28:18.624
different publication, it's the start of censorship.

0:28:19.011,0:28:25.437
Of course, we feel that it's more important when it's happening in

0:28:25.437,0:28:31.159
some non-democratic regime but I would like to say it's more broader

0:28:31.159,0:28:34.592
than just those country. Thank you.

0:28:36.863,0:28:41.773
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you. So there was a question from the

0:28:41.773,0:28:46.050
audience, which we will go to and that will give me a moment to get

0:28:46.050,0:28:47.438
Vint settled.

0:28:47.441,0:28:50.691
>> COURTNEY RADSCH: Thank you. Can you hear me?

0:28:50.701,0:28:52.365
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Yes and could you introduce yourself as well?

0:28:53.085,0:28:55.484
>> COURTNEY RADSCH: My name is Courtney Radsch, I am with Freedom

0:28:55.484,0:28:58.688
House and also an academic writing my dissertation about cyber

0:28:58.688,0:29:03.268
activism. And so I'm very interested by the last person's comments,

0:29:03.268,0:29:09.920
I'm sorry I didn't catch your name -- Nick. You mentioned at the end

0:29:09.920,0:29:14.620
about the efforts by Iran to create their own national Internet. We

0:29:14.620,0:29:20.014
see this very much across the world as regimes are learning from each

0:29:20.014,0:29:26.516
other, et cetera, but I was fascinated by your example of time and how

0:29:26.516,0:29:29.676
that developed out of the steam network. And time does not belong to

0:29:29.676,0:29:34.904
any countries, right? The countries not sovereignty over time. So why

0:29:34.904,0:29:40.058
do we not conceive of the Internet as something, why are we -- let me

0:29:40.058,0:29:45.159
rephrase that -- why are we conceiving of the Internet based on

0:29:45.159,0:29:50.209
sovereign nation state boundaries? Doesn't the Internet hold the

0:29:50.209,0:29:55.268
potential along with other trends such as the power of multinational

0:29:55.268,0:30:00.940
corporations and the power of individuals to connect across borders,

0:30:00.940,0:30:05.344
hold the potential for conceiving of a different set of organizing

0:30:05.344,0:30:10.859
principles outside of nation state sovereignty? And I think that it

0:30:10.859,0:30:13.962
would be interesting to hear at this forum if we can get beyond this

0:30:13.962,0:30:18.597
idea of the nation state. It concerns me both from a human rights

0:30:18.597,0:30:22.530
perspective, but also as an individual who has grown up with the

0:30:22.530,0:30:28.246
Internet, that we are still conceiving of the Internet and its rules

0:30:28.246,0:30:32.550
as being governed by states and that they should still get to govern -- they govern

0:30:32.550,0:30:37.868
their citizens so we don't care what they do inside of their borders,

0:30:37.868,0:30:39.840
but online, we have the potential to have something different. I

0:30:39.840,0:30:43.145
would love for us to think about, how do we make that possible?

0:30:44.489,0:30:48.673
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So thank you. That's also a very -- I'm lacking a

0:30:48.673,0:30:51.701
word this late in the day -- question. But let me first go to Nick

0:30:51.701,0:30:54.940
because the question was specifically directed to him, and then we'll

0:30:54.940,0:30:57.923
ask Vint to come in and add any comments he'd like to to the last

0:30:57.923,0:31:03.061
comment. We actually started this discussion with some discussion on

0:31:03.061,0:31:06.716
the Core Internet Values and the question - are they alive and well, are they under

0:31:06.716,0:31:08.347
threat?

0:31:08.994,0:31:11.979
>> NICK ASHTON-HART Well, I would say, you know, can we move to a

0:31:11.979,0:31:15.577
conception that is not based on the old, centuries old, concept of

0:31:15.577,0:31:18.913
sovereignty. I certainly hope that's true. I certainly hope that's

0:31:18.913,0:31:22.832
true. In fact, I think it's inevitable that we will do. I think you

0:31:22.832,0:31:27.043
already see social constructions which on the Internet, which are not

0:31:27.043,0:31:32.408
boundary related. They are bounded by what people identifying with

0:31:32.408,0:31:35.973
other people that are perceived to be like them, which is a more human

0:31:35.973,0:31:42.429
construct than a physical border. But just like it wasn't overnight

0:31:42.429,0:31:47.010
that people said well, I'm going to give up my concept of time in my

0:31:47.010,0:31:50.848
village, and agree on a national or international concept of time. It

0:31:50.848,0:31:52.699
actually took a little while.

0:31:52.924,0:31:56.614
There's some interesting books on it. It was quite controversial and

0:31:56.614,0:31:59.482
people felt very strongly about this. They felt if they gave up the

0:31:59.482,0:32:05.929
ability to determine what time it was, they were giving up their

0:32:05.929,0:32:11.141
concept of the world in a real visceral way. This is why you still

0:32:11.141,0:32:13.642
have daylight savings time and this kind of stuff. We've -- in two

0:32:13.642,0:32:17.980
and a half centuries, we haven't totally disposed of this. We are still

0:32:17.980,0:32:22.749
changing the time in the summer because of the perception of people

0:32:22.749,0:32:26.001
who wake up early in agrarian environments.

0:32:26.255,0:32:33.150
So, I hope, and I believe, that that vision -- we will get to that vision.

0:32:33.150,0:32:36.539
All I'm saying is I think we may have to be patient. It may take some

0:32:36.539,0:32:40.853
time for social constructions to catch up with a boundaryless world.

0:32:40.853,0:32:42.670
That's all.

0:32:43.339,0:32:47.238
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So Vint, if you could also just say a word or two to

0:32:47.238,0:32:49.737
introduce yourself. I am sure you are known to everybody here, but

0:32:49.737,0:32:52.320
when people look back at these archives in 10, 20, 30 years,,

0:32:52.617,0:32:55.644
>> VINT CERF: They will wonder who was that bearded, ancient person.

0:32:55.644,0:32:59.676
Hello, I'm the talking dinosaur on the panel. My name is Vint Cerf,

0:32:59.676,0:33:05.856
I'm Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist at Google. The

0:33:05.856,0:33:10.125
question that you've raised is one which I have recently become

0:33:10.125,0:33:15.903
intensely interested in, thanks to two things that have happened in

0:33:15.903,0:33:19.419
literally the last few days, partly a consequence of this Internet

0:33:19.419,0:33:25.776
Governance Forum. Bertrand de La Chapelle, who is probably known to

0:33:25.776,0:33:31.025
you, is the 21st century reincarnation of an 18th century French

0:33:31.025,0:33:37.564
philosopher. And he gives us much to think. He says that the notion

0:33:37.564,0:33:43.532
of sovereignty in a highly connected environment may have to change

0:33:43.532,0:33:49.948
because actions taken on the sovereign grounds may have impact on

0:33:49.948,0:33:56.521
others outside of the territory of that sovereign domain. He gives an

0:33:56.521,0:34:00.969
analogy where river is flowing through country A and country A chooses

0:34:00.969,0:34:05.625
to pollute the river just as it leaves the borders of country A and

0:34:05.625,0:34:10.727
flows into country B visiting all kind of serious and deleterious

0:34:10.727,0:34:13.131
results on country B.

0:34:13.578,0:34:21.906
The gentleman Minister from India, Mr. Sibal, made a rather bold

0:34:21.906,0:34:26.126
statement that sovereignty was dead and that the concept of

0:34:26.126,0:34:31.550
sovereignty was no longer appropriate in the Internet environment.

0:34:31.550,0:34:37.133
I'm not quite prepared to give up all notions of sovereignty but I

0:34:37.133,0:34:41.109
will tell you, and remind you, that John Perry Barlow wrote an

0:34:41.109,0:34:47.300
interesting manifesto about the online environment of cyberspace. I

0:34:47.300,0:34:53.682
can't reproduce it literally, but it basically said the cyberspace is

0:34:53.682,0:34:59.078
a different universe and you governments can butt out. I don't think

0:34:59.078,0:35:03.528
we can quite get away with this yet, and here's why. If we want to

0:35:03.528,0:35:10.187
adopt a non-national kind of environment in the Internet, we have to

0:35:10.187,0:35:16.459
emulate at least some of the protections that are given to us under

0:35:16.459,0:35:22.427
the notion of sovereign social contract. We expect the governments to

0:35:22.427,0:35:26.862
protect the citizenry. We actually give up some of our freedoms in

0:35:26.862,0:35:33.433
exchange for safer environment. When we are harmed we expect that the

0:35:33.433,0:35:40.177
state will have set up processes so that we can recover from that harm.

0:35:40.177,0:35:46.126
That the victim has recourse against the party perpetrating the harm.

0:35:46.126,0:35:52.715
There are a variety of other social order elements that show up in

0:35:52.715,0:35:57.164
this social contract. If we are going to move away from the

0:35:57.164,0:36:01.927
mechanisms that sovereignty gave us, we will have to find a way to

0:36:01.927,0:36:06.479
reincarnate something like that in the cyberspace environment, because

0:36:06.479,0:36:10.292
if we don't then we will have no recourse against harms occurring to

0:36:10.292,0:36:15.959
us in that space. So, this isn't to argue that sovereignty needs to

0:36:15.959,0:36:19.121
be retained necessarily but it's an argument that something has to be

0:36:19.121,0:36:24.325
introduced into the cyberspace environment that provides protections

0:36:24.325,0:36:30.004
and assurances of safety for people who are using that space. And

0:36:30.004,0:36:32.024
that may take some effort.

0:36:32.823,0:36:40.084
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Yes. And just while the mic is going to the young

0:36:40.084,0:36:43.594
woman there? Are there any questions from the remote participants in

0:36:43.594,0:36:46.303
queue? Not yet.

0:36:47.039,0:36:51.488
>> COURTNEY RADSCH: So, I think that might be the case if we are

0:36:51.488,0:36:55.672
talking about democracies, but I think if you look at North Korea, if

0:36:55.672,0:36:57.708
you look at Burma before the transition, if you look at many

0:36:57.708,0:37:03.772
authoritarian governments, there is no social contract, right? So we

0:37:03.772,0:37:07.881
are talking about sovereignty, I think in the United States is very

0:37:07.881,0:37:13.318
different, but the problem with this idea of national sovereignty is

0:37:13.318,0:37:17.541
that means they get to control whatever they want to do over that

0:37:17.541,0:37:20.658
population of the citizenry. And so, you know, when we are talking

0:37:20.658,0:37:25.423
about the Internet, I think that looking at the nation state as being

0:37:25.423,0:37:28.304
sovereign over these parts, I mean this is what's happening in Iran.

0:37:28.304,0:37:32.740
That's why they can create their own Internet, same with Saudi Arabia

0:37:32.740,0:37:36.261
being able to create only one Internet access point and control all

0:37:36.261,0:37:43.008
Internet flows. And I disagree that we're definitely on the track towards

0:37:43.008,0:37:47.320
getting above and beyond that notion, I think there's a very strong

0:37:47.320,0:37:52.355
push back against that. And that there are many states, and democracies

0:37:52.355,0:37:55.988
included, who are very much trying to maintain the traditional

0:37:55.988,0:37:59.023
concepts of sovereignty. So I would just push back a little bit on that.

0:37:59.300,0:38:03.096
>> VINT CERF: Let's keep pushing. I still want to debate with you.

0:38:03.096,0:38:09.103
First of all, you seem to have avoided the point that I was trying

0:38:09.103,0:38:14.229
to emphasize, which is that if we are going -- if it were, in fact,

0:38:14.229,0:38:16.553
possible to create a uniform Internet, which we do not have for

0:38:16.553,0:38:22.687
exactly the reasons you just outlined, but supposing we had one, we

0:38:22.687,0:38:26.073
are still going to expect a kind of social contract in that environment. May

0:38:26.073,0:38:32.472
I ask if you reject that? You want to be unsafe in the Internet? Is

0:38:32.472,0:38:33.658
that what you are looking for?

0:38:33.910,0:38:36.264
>> COURTNEY RADSCH: I think we would need multiple social contracts.

0:38:36.264,0:38:38.537
I don't think there's going to be a single social contract.

0:38:38.751,0:38:40.848
>> VINT CERF: Then you are going to have a really tough time

0:38:40.848,0:38:43.968
figuring out how to deal with jurisdiction. You have a big problem. You

0:38:43.968,0:38:49.936
are going to have to come back to the table with a design that does

0:38:49.936,0:38:52.675
what you want it to do because right now I don't see it.

0:38:53.919,0:38:57.797
I'm not disagreeing with the vision that you have necessarily, but I

0:38:57.797,0:39:02.035
would posit that we are certainly going to need some kind of

0:39:02.035,0:39:05.756
protections, you are saying maybe more than one. I don't understand

0:39:05.756,0:39:08.200
how the jurisdictional questions get solved, but let's set that aside

0:39:08.200,0:39:11.608
for a moment. The other side of the coin is reality, and that is that

0:39:11.608,0:39:16.253
the Internet is constructed out of real things. It may be an ethereal

0:39:16.253,0:39:22.529
space of concepts and abstractions, but it arises out of a real,

0:39:22.529,0:39:28.013
physical system and the real physical system does lie inside of nation

0:39:28.013,0:39:32.391
state boundaries, and unless we were going to do away from nation states which

0:39:32.391,0:39:34.590
I don't think is likely to happen in the near term, they will have the

0:39:34.590,0:39:36.615
ability to do a certain amount of control.

0:39:36.851,0:39:44.238
So the attractive vision that you dangle in front of us is not

0:39:44.238,0:39:49.367
necessarily reachable if there are -- if nation states as they exist

0:39:49.367,0:39:54.422
today have the ability to control that virtual environment that --

0:39:54.422,0:40:00.907
that you seek to instantiate. I don't know how to undo that either,

0:40:00.907,0:40:04.788
no matter how hard we may work at special pieces of software to tunnel our

0:40:04.788,0:40:10.484
way out of the traps that we might exist in. That is still an

0:40:10.484,0:40:17.015
artifact and anything we can do, technically other people can

0:40:17.015,0:40:21.622
interfere with. So I think we are a ways away from being able to

0:40:21.622,0:40:24.271
realize that vision. But it's very important to recognize that, if we

0:40:24.271,0:40:27.450
were to realize the vision, we'd still have to figure out how to

0:40:27.450,0:40:30.373
make it the place that we want to live in.

0:40:30.394,0:40:33.865
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Vint and now Alejandro has asked to get

0:40:33.865,0:40:35.095
in the queue.

0:40:35.848,0:40:43.247
>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: Thank you, Lynn. Again, I'm a little bit

0:40:43.247,0:40:45.567
uncomfortable with the radio format here.

0:40:45.895,0:40:48.511
(Laughter).

0:40:48.863,0:40:53.047
So this is Alejandro Pisanty speaking. I think this exchange points

0:40:53.047,0:40:59.743
us in -- towards some of the things -- ways to do things, and things

0:40:59.743,0:41:03.364
to attend to, that will be very productive for a group of interested

0:41:03.364,0:41:07.235
people of all stakeholder groups. So I will go back first. This post-

0:41:07.235,0:41:12.815
Westphalian regime which would look beyond -- let's say to have a lot

0:41:12.815,0:41:19.765
more power and a lot more of life defined by life on the 'Net, instead

0:41:19.765,0:41:24.215
of life determined by nation states has been pointed out long ago

0:41:24.215,0:41:27.718
among others by Wolfgang Kleinwachter in the Internet Governance

0:41:27.718,0:41:32.743
sphere, and long before that with utopian cyberspace visions of John Perry

0:41:32.743,0:41:37.943
Barlow and many others. It has also been described by Manuel Castells

0:41:37.943,0:41:41.095
as the Space of flows and it's something that we actually do know a

0:41:41.095,0:41:46.115
lot about. And, of course, we know a lot about that and we know a lot about

0:41:46.115,0:41:49.441
the limits that we find, the boundaries that we meet, and the walls

0:41:49.441,0:41:53.449
against we bump, when we get to the nation states. And we know that

0:41:53.449,0:41:58.675
some of the walls between nation states are a lot harder, and less

0:41:58.675,0:42:02.915
porous, like some of the ones you mentioned. In a UN context like the Internet Governance

0:42:02.915,0:42:07.432
Forum, we refrain from pointing out specific countries but

0:42:07.432,0:42:11.529
innuendo and other rhetoric tricks allow you to know exactly who you

0:42:11.529,0:42:14.130
are speaking about, even more.

0:42:14.422,0:42:25.763
So, the way I see that this very valuable exchange feeds into the work

0:42:25.763,0:42:29.818
of the Dynamic Coalition is very concrete. It's a very direct

0:42:29.818,0:42:37.036
funneling. What we want to see happening over the next years is that

0:42:37.036,0:42:40.388
the way the Internet continues to be built and expanded -- and it's

0:42:40.388,0:42:45.015
not the way the Internet grows and expands, because that doesn't

0:42:45.015,0:42:48.266
happen spontaneously -- it's people, companies, governments, technical

0:42:48.266,0:42:51.134
organizations doing it. So, the way the Internet continues to be built

0:42:51.134,0:42:59.348
and expanded has to be in such a way that it allows by design, or

0:42:59.348,0:43:05.413
incentivates and invites by design to live more in the Space of flows,

0:43:05.413,0:43:10.923
to live more to make more easy to have the -- those transnational

0:43:10.923,0:43:15.443
flows that are easy to do, that are the low hanging fruit like the

0:43:15.443,0:43:18.709
transfer of information, for example, communication, right to free

0:43:18.709,0:43:24.519
speech, right to free association. These are easily available,

0:43:24.519,0:43:30.875
compared to things like taxation or, as Vint mentioned, the ultimate

0:43:30.875,0:43:34.201
social function of the monopoly -- the legitimate monopoly of force,

0:43:34.201,0:43:39.448
that corresponds to protecting the citizens militarily or let's say,

0:43:39.448,0:43:44.321
at a level of physical security. That's a harder wall to climb but we

0:43:44.321,0:43:48.643
do want, is to make sure that the design with neutrality, with

0:43:48.643,0:43:52.528
openness, with interoperability, with multistakeholder decentralized

0:43:52.528,0:43:58.308
decision making, goes in the way of enabling these transnational

0:43:58.308,0:44:05.177
global way of working against a trend which would enable more easily

0:44:05.177,0:44:09.770
the national boundaries to prevail more strongly against even those

0:44:09.770,0:44:13.238
things that you have already achieved to do in the Space of flows.

0:44:13.238,0:44:17.303
That will tell us a lot of what we will have to be watchful for. If we

0:44:17.303,0:44:23.115
see, as you mentioned national Internets, if we see layers of national

0:44:23.115,0:44:30.454
Internets-like proposals to administrate the IPv6 addressing with

0:44:30.454,0:44:37.315
national administration, if we see coercion or legal mandates to link

0:44:37.315,0:44:44.322
IDNs to nationalized ccTLD management instead of the enlightened

0:44:44.322,0:44:49.033
global ccTLD management we have, and that to do things like taxation,

0:44:49.033,0:44:54.235
civil life expression, individuals registration, before speaking,

0:44:54.235,0:44:58.982
anything that builds that platform, that would -- would have to cause

0:44:58.982,0:45:02.366
an alarm to be sounded and action to be taken by those who can

0:45:02.366,0:45:05.617
actually take action. I think that feeds very directly into the need

0:45:05.617,0:45:09.401
for this Dynamic Coalition to exist and operate.

0:45:09.972,0:45:15.180
>> VINT CERF: This is -- I'm sorry I don't mean to prolong this

0:45:15.180,0:45:20.468
unnecessarily, but it occurs to me that if you look at this sort of

0:45:20.468,0:45:26.037
utopian view of Internet, one thing you need to keep in mind is you

0:45:26.037,0:45:30.265
are not your avatar. You are you. Your avatar is only a

0:45:30.265,0:45:34.201
representation of you. The map is not the territory. And it's

0:45:34.201,0:45:41.024
inescapable that the Internet is rooted in a physical world. So if we

0:45:41.024,0:45:47.013
are going to move away from purely national boundaries for legal

0:45:47.013,0:45:51.082
jurisdictions and the like, there will have to be at least some amount of

0:45:51.082,0:45:59.834
multilateral or global agreement about social norms and at least legal

0:45:59.834,0:46:05.232
norms that will allow abuses to be dealt with in this cyber

0:46:05.232,0:46:06.894
environment.

0:46:06.894,0:46:10.424
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Well, I have to thank you for the question. It's

0:46:10.424,0:46:14.724
obviously given rise to a lot of very interesting debate and I also

0:46:14.724,0:46:18.405
appreciate Alejandro I think starting to move the discussion forward

0:46:18.405,0:46:21.579
with what might this Dynamic Coalition do going forward? Before we

0:46:21.579,0:46:25.337
pick that up, there was actually a question or a comment from a remote

0:46:25.337,0:46:27.830
participant.

0:46:27.830,0:46:51.627
(No audio).

0:46:51.627,0:46:56.857
>> REMOTE MODERATOR: Thank you very much. As a follow-up to previous

0:46:56.857,0:47:05.827
questions, we got several questions from our remote participants.

0:47:05.827,0:47:12.344
First, a question was from Joly MacFie. As entertainment is

0:47:12.344,0:47:18.554
increasingly delivered via Internet content distribution networks, how does

0:47:18.554,0:47:23.595
this affect peering arrangements and the end-to-end principle, as

0:47:23.595,0:47:28.590
users access content rather than hosts?

0:47:28.590,0:47:38.036
The next question was from the United States, from Marcus Ledbetter.

0:47:38.036,0:47:42.542
Do we all agree that this is just one Internet?

0:47:42.542,0:47:51.258
And the last one, was to Mr. Vint Cerf, balancing sovereignty,

0:47:51.258,0:47:56.211
openeness, regulation, and national laws, seems to me a very tricky and hard

0:47:56.211,0:48:02.046
job to do. So my question to Vint Cerf, which body do you think would

0:48:02.046,0:48:06.975
have the task to manage this complex task?

0:48:06.975,0:48:13.963
>> VINT CERF: OK. Shall I try to answer the last one? Maybe this

0:48:13.963,0:48:20.729
Dynamic Coalition is where that solution starts. Maybe this is a

0:48:20.729,0:48:25.657
group that can begin examining what's possible and what isn't. It's

0:48:25.657,0:48:30.246
pretty clear, though, if you are going to have international

0:48:30.246,0:48:36.897
agreements that create a kind of homologized legal framework, that

0:48:36.897,0:48:40.566
ultimately you are going to have to go to bodies like the World Trade

0:48:40.566,0:48:44.327
Organization, or the World Intellectual Property Organization, or

0:48:44.327,0:48:49.028
other parts of the UN -- or you are going to have to go to a

0:48:49.028,0:48:53.995
collection of multilateral treaties in order to establish agreement.

0:48:53.995,0:48:56.948
I think we will probably end up starting with the lowest common

0:48:56.948,0:49:01.543
denominator, simple things. For example, what does a notarization

0:49:01.543,0:49:06.025
mean, and what's a digital signature mean, and does it have common

0:49:06.025,0:49:08.978
weight in all countries? We're going to have to build this up a

0:49:08.978,0:49:12.246
little bit at a time. I don't think there's one body that solves all

0:49:12.246,0:49:15.595
the problems.

0:49:15.595,0:49:19.841
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: There were two other questions that were posed.

0:49:19.841,0:49:23.138
One was do we all agree there is one Internet and the other had to do

0:49:23.138,0:49:27.992
with content and peer to peer and whether the impact on the end-to-

0:49:27.992,0:49:30.242
end.

0:49:30.242,0:49:34.722
So I'm sure Vint's ready to jump in and respond to that. But is there

0:49:34.722,0:49:39.343
anyone else who wants to -- Nick, and then Paul.

0:49:39.343,0:49:41.926
>> NICK ASHTON-HART This is Nick Ashton-Hart. So on the content

0:49:41.926,0:49:44.693
question, I'll take that one. since I will be cursed for the rest of my life

0:49:44.693,0:49:48.758
in dealing with -- with copyrighted material and what happens to it,

0:49:48.758,0:49:55.367
given that I was a music manager for over 20 years, off and on. This

0:49:55.367,0:49:58.487
is the great -- this is a perfect example of the clash between

0:49:58.487,0:50:03.508
sovereignty law and the real world of the Internet and how it's really

0:50:03.508,0:50:08.639
used. The copyright system is a national system and it's implemented

0:50:08.639,0:50:13.557
different in different countries and yet cloud computing by its nature

0:50:13.557,0:50:16.793
means that you access the same resource, two different times in the

0:50:16.793,0:50:21.124
same day and you are accessing multiple different servers in multiple

0:50:21.124,0:50:26.253
different countries on each of those occasions.

0:50:26.253,0:50:33.469
And the application -- how to deal with the legal issues there. There

0:50:33.469,0:50:38.843
has been a treaty negotiation going on in Europe for 50 years to try

0:50:38.843,0:50:45.144
and determine how international law and private law, the law of

0:50:45.144,0:50:48.287
individual countries, works together? And they have been unable to

0:50:48.287,0:50:53.282
agree this. This is an enormously thorny question. I think it's

0:50:53.282,0:51:02.937
certainly true that the desire for enforcement has an impact on what

0:51:02.937,0:51:06.026
people can access. We all can see that the iTunes store has different

0:51:06.026,0:51:09.441
material at different times. And I do think we're going to have to

0:51:09.441,0:51:14.774
come up with some way to internationalize the way in which rights --

0:51:14.774,0:51:18.941
national rights work in an international environment. There's going to

0:51:18.941,0:51:22.144
have to be some way around that. It's not just for entertainment

0:51:22.144,0:51:26.744
contentment but simply for the efficient functioning of services upon

0:51:26.744,0:51:33.690
which increasingly large amounts of the economy rely. Pfizer, one of

0:51:33.690,0:51:37.646
the world's largest drug companies, recently transferred its entire

0:51:37.646,0:51:43.245
supply chain and connected directly all of its vendors to a cloud-based system

0:51:43.245,0:51:47.621
so that they can see in realtime absolutely everything about their

0:51:47.621,0:51:50.027
product. Where they are being made, where they are being shipped,

0:51:50.027,0:51:55.839
where they are running out of them? And this is going to become

0:51:55.839,0:52:00.741
increasingly the case, and the more of the world that is integrated in

0:52:00.741,0:52:05.941
that way, the more in which conflicts of laws become very

0:52:05.941,0:52:11.872
difficult. There is going to have to be some change in the conception of how laws

0:52:11.872,0:52:17.653
work on the Internet. And I think the 50-year conversation will end

0:52:17.653,0:52:21.155
much sooner -- it won't take another 50 years because the commercial

0:52:21.155,0:52:26.519
realities of dealing with this will require a pragmatic result that

0:52:26.519,0:52:30.271
wasn't required by the situation over the last 50 years. It was an

0:52:30.271,0:52:33.287
academic discussion for 50 years because it could be. Now it's not

0:52:33.287,0:52:36.200
academic anymore.

0:52:36.200,0:52:40.056
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Nick. Paul?

0:52:40.056,0:52:43.249
>> PAUL WILSON: I wanted to answer the question about one Internet in

0:52:43.249,0:52:46.820
a slightly different way, and that's -- but it's a way that depends on

0:52:46.820,0:52:54.704
how you define the Internet in asking the question. Because I used the

0:52:54.704,0:52:58.854
term loosely before in terms of how, what would the Internet be like

0:52:58.854,0:53:04.287
ten years down the track, or some time down the track, and would it become a different Internet.

0:53:04.287,0:53:06.990
In that case, the Internet's kind of everything, it's the universe

0:53:06.990,0:53:10.539
that we are talking about. There's only just one of those. But if you

0:53:10.539,0:53:14.105
start to drill down through that either to the level of users, or

0:53:14.105,0:53:17.885
content, or applications, then it's really -- the Internet is in the

0:53:17.885,0:53:23.996
eye of the beholder, and there are many different ways to perceive the Internet, and I think it's withiin all of those layers that we

0:53:23.996,0:53:26.321
start to get confused in Internet Governance. What are we really

0:53:26.321,0:53:28.725
talking about? There's the broad definition, there's the narrow

0:53:28.725,0:53:33.945
definition. But actually speaking technically the Internet is the

0:53:33.945,0:53:38.181
transport layer of the network that we are talking about. It is the

0:53:38.181,0:53:43.461
thing that I was referring to before that is the single global neutral

0:53:43.461,0:53:46.982
network that allows any point to connect to any other point, and

0:53:46.982,0:53:53.667
actually that thing is in its ideal form that we are all working to

0:53:53.667,0:53:57.957
preserve. It is one network. And that is the beauty of it. So let's

0:53:57.981,0:54:02.519
not sort of mix up ourselves too much about saying which Internet we

0:54:02.519,0:54:05.976
are talking about, and yes there are many, or yes there are none,

0:54:05.976,0:54:08.568
because if you want to be quite specific about the Internet layer of

0:54:08.568,0:54:11.983
the network that we all enjoy, the Internet layer is the transport

0:54:11.983,0:54:15.249
layer. There has to be just one of those and it's really not a matter

0:54:15.249,0:54:19.019
of perspective, it really is -- is simply the technical infrastructure

0:54:19.019,0:54:23.066
and that is something that, as within this discussion about values, we

0:54:23.066,0:54:27.704
should really identify, as I say, which Internet we are talking about

0:54:27.704,0:54:30.439
and be quite precise about that. Thanks.

0:54:30.439,0:54:35.273
>> VINT CERF: So it's Vint again. I would like to make a small nuance

0:54:35.273,0:54:39.845
here. We all understand that the Internet protocols don't necessarily

0:54:39.845,0:54:42.854
have to be used in the global interconnected sytem. People have used

0:54:42.854,0:54:46.528
these same protocols to build private networks. But I don't consider

0:54:46.528,0:54:52.354
those to be capital-I Internet, those are lowercase-I, clones that

0:54:52.354,0:54:57.061
don't have the same scope and probably have very different intent. I

0:54:57.061,0:55:03.226
wanted to come back though to this question of rights management and dealing

0:55:03.226,0:55:10.258
with intellectual property in a digital environment. It occurs to me

0:55:10.258,0:55:15.888
that, if we treat content as digital objects for just a moment, not

0:55:15.888,0:55:19.110
differentiating what they are, whether they are books, novels, music, or some

0:55:19.110,0:55:24.691
game or some other thing, piece of software, just imagine them as bags

0:55:24.691,0:55:26.758
full of bits.

0:55:26.758,0:55:32.344
And if we thought that it was possible to build mechanisms for access

0:55:32.344,0:55:38.006
control to those bags of bits so there was some form of enforcement

0:55:38.006,0:55:42.909
for access and use, if we thought it was possible to achieve that,

0:55:42.909,0:55:49.903
then we might actually come to a general purpose solution to the

0:55:49.903,0:55:52.639
problem of --that you were talking about, Nick.

0:55:52.639,0:55:57.822
And so, I think there may be technical mechanisms that might be

0:55:57.822,0:56:02.867
implemented to make access to digital content, and digital objects of

0:56:02.867,0:56:09.934
all kinds, manageable. And here, I think, if we were able to demonstrate that

0:56:09.934,0:56:14.409
you could establish whatever terms and conditions you wished and that these

0:56:14.409,0:56:17.845
are for access and use, and if those terms and conditions could really

0:56:17.845,0:56:25.988
be enforced, technically enforced, then many of the problems that have

0:56:25.988,0:56:29.594
arisen in the national context of copyright, for instance, would

0:56:29.594,0:56:36.061
evaporate, and be assimilated into this more general system.

0:56:36.061,0:56:39.095
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So I want to see if there are any remote

0:56:39.095,0:56:42.510
participants or anybody here in the audience who would like to either

0:56:42.510,0:56:47.592
follow up or engage on any of the discussions to date or a new topic.

0:56:47.592,0:56:50.774
We need a mic up here in the front row.

0:56:50.774,0:57:08.742
(Silence)

0:57:08.742,0:57:12.655
>> SUBI CHATURVEDI: Hi. My name is Subi Chaturvedi and I teach

0:57:12.655,0:57:15.510
journalism and communication at Delhi University, and I run a

0:57:15.510,0:57:19.212
foundation called Media for Change. We just put together one of the

0:57:19.212,0:57:26.204
first IGFs in India. I think it's been a fantastic experience for me just

0:57:26.204,0:57:29.809
to have been here and experienced this. But when we are

0:57:29.809,0:57:33.296
looking at the core values of the Internet and there have been several

0:57:33.296,0:57:38.945
threats that I've observed just now and the fact that we are having a

0:57:38.945,0:57:44.534
discussion. But I'm coming from a country which is India, and when we

0:57:44.534,0:57:50.892
talk about access, diversity precedes access, and I do not think that

0:57:50.892,0:57:55.696
the question of Internet as a physical layer that transports data.

0:57:55.696,0:58:01.432
Because the Internet in India, per se has been an enabler, it's been a

0:58:01.432,0:58:06.586
facilitator. it's meant different things to different people. And as,

0:58:06.586,0:58:12.514
probably Susan would read things, it is not one thing but many, and

0:58:12.514,0:58:14.566
then we are looking at core values.

0:58:14.566,0:58:19.135
I wanted Vint in particular to address this because I would slightly

0:58:19.135,0:58:23.881
disagree. The discussion on the Internet and the future of the

0:58:23.881,0:58:29.066
Internet has almost not been academic enough. On the contrary, it's

0:58:29.066,0:58:32.537
been in every space possible. I would on the other hand

0:58:32.537,0:58:37.904
suggest that we need to institutionalize learnings both from the IGF.

0:58:37.904,0:58:41.640
It's been a fantastic bottoms up approach. So there are two questions

0:58:41.640,0:58:46.018
there because there's clearly -- and I'm putting this across in the

0:58:46.018,0:58:50.616
context of the ITU and the ITRs, we are looking at a situation where

0:58:50.616,0:58:55.103
we could be writing binding, mandatory treaties. So what happens to

0:58:55.103,0:58:59.688
core values such as permissionless innovation, openness, the idea of

0:58:59.688,0:59:02.170
putting together structures, and the modularity of Internet. Because

0:59:02.170,0:59:05.437
clearly some of the issues that the -- the new ITRs are trying to

0:59:05.437,0:59:10.706
address are local, they're domestic. And then we are trying to bring

0:59:10.706,0:59:14.101
in questions like IP to IP interconnectivity in spaces such as those.

0:59:14.101,0:59:17.944
So, my concerns are many and there are several threads and strains of

0:59:17.944,0:59:21.534
questions. I don't even know if I have been able to articulate the

0:59:21.534,0:59:26.186
right thing but if some of the panelists could comment or take those

0:59:26.186,0:59:28.998
issues up, I'd be most grateful. Thank you.

0:59:28.998,0:59:31.345
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I'm sure Vint"s in the queue,

0:59:31.345,0:59:33.359
>> VINT CERF: Yeah, anybody else?

0:59:33.359,0:59:35.884
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Alejandro and Nick.

0:59:35.884,0:59:45.518
>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: Thank you. And I will ask you for your name

0:59:45.518,0:59:49.848
later for the record I am keeping. And I think that I am very glad to

0:59:49.848,0:59:54.516
hear that the discussion is not academic enough. At the same time that

0:59:54.516,0:59:58.151
I hear -- especially at the same time that I hear the discussion is

0:59:58.151,1:00:02.099
too academic. I think we are lacking. We are continuously lacking

1:00:02.099,1:00:07.863
discussions in both senses. I think there's a dearth of academic --

1:00:07.863,1:00:14.147
solid academic research and reflection, that has to expand the body

1:00:14.147,1:00:17.732
that's already growing from many other angles, and on the other hand,

1:00:17.732,1:00:24.033
we have to be able to take the knowledge, the informed opinion, that

1:00:24.033,1:00:29.810
we are obtaining in the I -- from academic discussions down to -- to

1:00:29.810,1:00:33.185
the questions as you have mentioned, for example, how to institutionalize the

1:00:33.185,1:00:38.697
knowledge coming from the IGF without institutionalizing the IGF too

1:00:38.697,1:00:44.991
much, because that's one thing that we continuously want to -- I won't

1:00:44.991,1:00:47.739
say to avoid, but to manage properly.

1:00:47.739,1:00:51.537
And, again, you mentioned what happens to the core values, things like

1:00:51.537,1:00:59.352
the ITRs have the potential to crystallize or to -- yeah, or else I

1:00:59.352,1:01:03.864
will keep it to that, to crystallize things that should continue to be

1:01:03.864,1:01:09.231
flexible, and that's the kind of permanent watch that probably a well

1:01:09.231,1:01:13.915
functioning Dynamic Coalition on Internet Core Values should be able

1:01:13.915,1:01:18.403
to at least report on and maybe deliver the appropriate calls for

1:01:18.403,1:01:21.349
action.

1:01:21.349,1:01:23.536
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So I'll go to Nick and Vint and in the last 15

1:01:23.536,1:01:27.719
minutes, that was an excellent series of questions, in the next 15

1:01:27.719,1:01:32.102
minutes I would like to go to what might this Dynamic Coalition

1:01:32.102,1:01:36.169
address going forward. The reason we keep coming back with these

1:01:36.169,1:01:38.992
workshops is because we have interesting discussions like this and we

1:01:38.992,1:01:42.437
find enough of interest to get us hooked. We get just now to take the

1:01:42.437,1:01:45.554
next step and be a little more concrete so we can actually keep it

1:01:45.554,1:01:48.755
alive between forums. So Nick?

1:01:48.755,1:01:53.186
>> NICK ASHTON-HART: I will try and start on that with this. Your

1:01:53.186,1:01:57.457
questions are excellent ones and it made me think that perhaps one of

1:01:57.457,1:02:04.419
the answers is WCIT itself because, as Alejandro and others have

1:02:04.419,1:02:10.696
described, because WCIT is designed to regulate the relationships that can

1:02:10.696,1:02:15.662
impact the permissionless nature of interconnectiion, as you put it,

1:02:15.662,1:02:20.465
the fundamental foundation of the Internet. That is why

1:02:20.465,1:02:24.325
they have attracted, I think, such a visceral and strong response. And so it

1:02:24.325,1:02:29.718
occurs to me that perhaps one of the things this coalition could do is

1:02:29.718,1:02:36.334
to try and articulate a vision for the fundamentals of the Internet,

1:02:36.334,1:02:45.084
and then recognize that people may take a different view about how

1:02:45.084,1:02:49.862
societies, not necessarily nation states, but how societies approach

1:02:49.862,1:02:55.345
information that is sent, differently than they approach the

1:02:55.345,1:03:00.351
importance of preserving the free flow of data inherently, and the

1:03:00.351,1:03:04.385
inherent architecture of the Internet, so that it can work. I hope

1:03:04.385,1:03:08.600
that that's not true. I hope that people understand that you can't have

1:03:08.600,1:03:13.342
one without the other, but maybe we can start -- we can get a broader

1:03:13.342,1:03:19.606
consensus if we start, saying how do we ensure the widest possible

1:03:19.606,1:03:23.084
access to the Internet, with the highest performance, at the lowest

1:03:23.084,1:03:25.950
cost, for the maximum number of people, on a permissionless basis,

1:03:25.950,1:03:32.091
such as we have enjoyed so far. So that we get as much of the world

1:03:32.091,1:03:37.709
online at the lowest cost possible, as a starting place, which is

1:03:37.709,1:03:41.388
obviously clearly happening as Internet access growth is exploding in

1:03:41.388,1:03:45.499
the areas where it is least dense. Maybe that's not the right

1:03:45.499,1:03:50.771
solution and you can all tell me I'm wrong but --

1:03:50.771,1:03:54.142
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Vint?

1:03:54.142,1:03:57.642
>> VINT CERF: I don't think you're wrong, Nick. It's Vint. Let me

1:03:57.642,1:04:04.883
start by asking you to think a little bit about how the Internet is

1:04:04.883,1:04:10.425
actually constructed. It is a layered architecture. I don't want to

1:04:10.425,1:04:17.123
make that overly rigid or prescriptive, but it's helpful to think of

1:04:17.123,1:04:22.354
it as a layered architecture, and what happens is that, as you work

1:04:22.354,1:04:29.356
your way up in the layers, you abstract from the behavior of the lower

1:04:29.356,1:04:35.091
layers, you actually hide some of the details. And as a consequence of

1:04:35.091,1:04:41.537
this abstraction going upwards, there are emerging properties that

1:04:41.537,1:04:46.990
come out of those abstractions. And what is interesting about the

1:04:46.990,1:04:50.007
emergent properties is that as you get up to the point where you are

1:04:50.007,1:04:54.142
in the application space, you are in a universe which is very nearly

1:04:54.142,1:04:59.880
unbounded because it is an artifact of software. It is literally an

1:04:59.880,1:05:04.062
artifact of what the software -- how the software interprets the bits

1:05:04.062,1:05:10.392
that it's moving around. The consequence of this notion of emergent

1:05:10.392,1:05:18.062
property is that the jurisdictional aspects of who is responsible for

1:05:18.062,1:05:23.661
what, how do you go about enforcing some particular practice might

1:05:23.661,1:05:28.581
vary from one layer to another, which is why, for example, we might

1:05:28.581,1:05:34.689
tolerate an ITR environment which is focused on the layers of physical

1:05:34.689,1:05:39.773
interconnection, but we might not tolerate an ITR environment that

1:05:39.773,1:05:43.855
looks up into the application space and says something about content

1:05:43.855,1:05:47.770
and what we can or can't say, or do.

1:05:47.770,1:05:56.505
So I think we are going to have to keep in mind that order arising out

1:05:56.505,1:06:03.254
of this abstraction and emergent properties is going to vary from one

1:06:03.254,1:06:05.785
layer to another.

1:06:05.785,1:06:10.423
Second point, I think, is that the Internet has evolved successfully

1:06:10.423,1:06:14.768
over the last 30 years of its operation primarily because it's been a

1:06:14.768,1:06:21.271
regulation-free environment. Most of the decisions that get made are

1:06:21.271,1:06:26.488
freely made among parties. The protocols that are invented and

1:06:26.488,1:06:31.736
adopted are a consequence of consensus in the IETF. The decision to

1:06:31.736,1:06:37.393
interconnect or not, or even to build a piece of Internet, or to

1:06:37.393,1:06:40.441
choose a particular piece of equipment, or a particular version of

1:06:40.441,1:06:46.321
software is entirely open. And each individual operator chooses, even

1:06:46.321,1:06:51.438
you do when you buy a router to put at home and build a Wi-Fi station,

1:06:51.438,1:06:56.771
you make a choice. Nobody dictates to you anything except, perhaps, you should

1:06:56.771,1:06:59.438
buy one that does the following things, because if you don't it won't

1:06:59.438,1:07:05.842
work. It should do IPv6 now because you need IPv6, things like that.

1:07:05.842,1:07:12.074
So I think that the one core principle that we don't want to lose, is

1:07:12.074,1:07:15.906
that the relatively deregulated environment has allowed a lot of other

1:07:15.906,1:07:23.473
forces and incentives to choose a way forward for Internet to evolve.

1:07:23.473,1:07:28.805
Prescribing its evolution with a set of constraining treaty-like

1:07:28.805,1:07:32.661
agreements does not sound like, we would reproduce in the next 20 years,

1:07:32.661,1:07:36.901
what we have enjoyed in the last 20.

1:07:36.901,1:07:40.445
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So I'm going to ask Siva to say some comments and

1:07:40.445,1:07:44.167
at the same time see if we can get a mic up here on the front. Because

1:07:44.167,1:07:47.866
Fatima wants to come in after. And while we do that I will say that

1:07:47.866,1:07:50.801
the small committee who was pulling the panel together obviously

1:07:50.801,1:07:53.983
failed horribly in terms of gender balance. I'm extremely happy

1:07:53.983,1:07:56.700
though that that the three questions we have had from the floor have

1:07:56.700,1:07:58.798
come from the women in the audience, so thank you.

1:07:58.798,1:08:02.840
But if you could get a mic over here for Fatima, while we go to Siva.

1:08:02.840,1:08:06.222
we'll be able to move forward a little more quickly.

1:08:06.222,1:08:08.811
>> SIVASUBRAMANIAN MUTHUSAMY: Actually there was supposed to be

1:08:08.811,1:08:11.498
greater gender balance, Désirée was supposed to be here and I made

1:08:11.498,1:08:15.795
some miscommunication error in communication so she is not here.

1:08:15.795,1:08:21.473
I want to reflect on the suggestion by Nick Ashton-Hart. He was

1:08:21.473,1:08:25.477
talking about the Coalition articulating a vision for the future of

1:08:25.477,1:08:29.538
the Internet. And what we could do is bring together some of the most

1:08:29.538,1:08:34.863
brilliant minds. Vint was talking about Bertrand, the 18th century

1:08:34.863,1:08:39.183
philosopher reincarnated in the 20th century. And I can think of

1:08:39.183,1:08:47.084
people, like diverse people, with diverse opinions, people like John Perry Barlow, Vint,

1:08:47.084,1:08:53.053
and some of the early founders of Internet, not only to think of

1:08:53.053,1:08:58.104
Internet as the layer, as it means to technical people, but to think

1:08:58.104,1:09:02.436
of Internet as what it means to the common man. It is -- it is much

1:09:02.436,1:09:06.683
broader than the layer. It is much bigger than the layer. It is

1:09:06.683,1:09:08.477
everything for the common man.

1:09:08.477,1:09:13.220
And we want to articulate a vision for that Internet, put together

1:09:13.220,1:09:16.825
some of the brilliant minds and come up with a vision and communicate

1:09:16.825,1:09:22.558
that vision to governments, to other stakeholders so that we start working

1:09:22.558,1:09:27.486
on it in the long term, and that is one of what I think we could do,

1:09:27.486,1:09:30.769
and it's open for corrections.

1:09:30.769,1:09:38.389
And the other thing we could to is have even between IGFs and not --

1:09:38.389,1:09:42.721
I'm not talking about only about events, some activity between IGFs.

1:09:42.721,1:09:48.853
It could be an event. It could be -- it could be anything. It could

1:09:48.853,1:09:53.334
be anything happening in different parts of world, one in New York,

1:09:53.334,1:09:57.933
one probably in Mexico, India, Pakistan, everywhere and so that way we

1:09:57.933,1:10:04.104
can continue our activities and we could also expand participation in

1:10:04.104,1:10:10.569
our mailing list. And so, these are some of my ideas and suggestions. And

1:10:10.569,1:10:16.058
it's for Lynn to think over and do it for the next one or two years or

1:10:16.058,1:10:18.572
more.

1:10:18.572,1:10:22.271
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: As somebody on my staff says, I think that was a

1:10:22.271,1:10:27.738
lateral pass to what he believes is a more nimble player! (Laughter).

1:10:27.738,1:10:29.290
I'm not sure the pass won't go back.

1:10:29.290,1:10:32.409
>> VINT CERF: That's called delegating upwards.

1:10:32.409,1:10:36.017
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I'm only doing what Siva tells me to do. Did you

1:10:36.017,1:10:39.706
have any other comments, Vint, before we go to Fatima?

1:10:39.706,1:10:50.366
>> FATIMA CAMBRONERO: Now? Ok, thank you. I'm Fatima Cambronero. I am

1:10:50.366,1:10:57.870
ISOC ambassador, but I speak in my personal capacity. We are speaking

1:10:57.870,1:11:03.056
about the bottom up processes and regarding to the future of the

1:11:03.056,1:11:07.359
Dynamic Coalition, it's a suggestion, I think it would be a good idea

1:11:07.359,1:11:16.223
to do the outreach in the national and regional IGFs, to get the input

1:11:16.223,1:11:20.553
of the community, the local and regional community, to the Global

1:11:20.553,1:11:33.080
Dynamic Coalition. Thank you.

1:11:33.080,1:11:37.011
>> SUBI CHATURVEDI: I will just make a twitter comment. I couldn't

1:11:37.011,1:11:40.514
agree more with Siva when he mentions the fact that there should be

1:11:40.514,1:11:45.463
more IGFs. You could call a rose by any name but one would want a

1:11:45.463,1:11:48.632
thousand flowers to bloom. One of the things that really concerns us

1:11:48.632,1:11:52.651
is when you are looking at any -- because Internet largely has

1:11:52.651,1:11:56.079
become for us in this part of the world, public good. When you are

1:11:56.079,1:12:01.092
looking at any policy that affects that, it has to be taken into

1:12:01.092,1:12:06.413
consensus by multistakeholders and it has to, has to look at opinions

1:12:06.413,1:12:10.729
because it's going to affect our future. So that was one submission.

1:12:10.729,1:12:14.245
And the second was, we've had the Occupy Wall Street, we've had the

1:12:14.245,1:12:17.496
Arab Spring. If you could look at this as an Internet Governance

1:12:17.496,1:12:22.310
movement and not merely a forum and keep us all connected, because

1:12:22.310,1:12:26.496
there are vulnerable communities, and I speak from the margins, and

1:12:26.496,1:12:30.958
mostly women and children are used as a peg by a lot of governments,

1:12:30.958,1:12:36.943
in a lot of spaces, for backhand regulation. So that must not happen.

1:12:36.943,1:12:41.144
And if we could somehow facilitate this process of engagement, and

1:12:41.144,1:12:45.490
disseminate the learnings, that becomes crucial because we celebrate

1:12:45.490,1:12:50.808
this movement. We celebrate this opportunity but I do believe we owe

1:12:50.808,1:12:55.642
it to the universe, at the risk of sounding dramatic, to make sure that we

1:12:55.642,1:12:59.487
preserve what we have, which is ours. Thank you.

1:12:59.487,1:13:02.440
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I'd sign up to follow you into that vision. In a

1:13:02.440,1:13:05.772
second. And we should certainly pull you into the steering committee,

1:13:05.772,1:13:08.521
if we can identify one as such.

1:13:08.521,1:13:11.207
>> VINT CERF: Did you just delegate in the other direction there?

1:13:11.207,1:13:14.785
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Just pulling in multiple voices. This is a Dynamic

1:13:14.785,1:13:18.141
Coalition which is composed of multiple stakeholders,

1:13:18.141,1:13:21.185
drawn from different communities.

1:13:21.185,1:13:25.140
Let me see, is there anybody who wants to come in or that or any other

1:13:25.140,1:13:27.856
suggestions? I know, we certainly have taken a number of

1:13:27.856,1:13:33.145
possibilities away in terms of things we might go do more concretely,

1:13:33.145,1:13:37.453
and we will get you the mic back. And we'll take that away. There is a

1:13:37.453,1:13:40.219
mailing list which is open, so please join the mailing list, and let's see if

1:13:40.219,1:13:46.055
we can identify some concrete activities. Yes, I know. Yes. We will go

1:13:46.055,1:13:50.445
to you and then we will go to Vint.

1:13:50.445,1:13:53.448
>> COURTNEY RADSCH: Hello, so on concrete recommendations and

1:13:53.448,1:13:56.387
following up on the comments, we were actually on a panel yesterday

1:13:56.387,1:14:01.075
about national and regional IGFs. And I think for those of us who are

1:14:01.075,1:14:05.155
attending the international IGF for the first time, but who have also

1:14:05.155,1:14:08.726
attended the national ones, it is very unclear how are these related

1:14:08.726,1:14:12.594
and how do these feed into each other?

1:14:12.594,1:14:20.029
And I want to go -- you -- yes, so Subi, you have a very long name,

1:14:20.029,1:14:24.509
the gentleman from India, mentioned what can we do inbetween. I mean,

1:14:24.509,1:14:28.354
one of these things could at least be to create a wiki or something

1:14:28.354,1:14:34.073
online where some of the outcome documents, can be put online, and

1:14:34.073,1:14:37.889
maybe have a discussion online. I think that having physical events

1:14:37.889,1:14:41.944
obviously produces barriers to participation, even though we do have

1:14:41.944,1:14:44.873
remote participation and that sort of thing. So I think there are

1:14:44.873,1:14:49.637
multiple ways of doing that, and you know, the core values of the

1:14:49.637,1:14:53.044
internet, ultimately, I think is one of the most important debates

1:14:53.044,1:14:56.256
that's at hand. So this is a great opportunity.

1:14:56.256,1:15:00.892
And one thing I would like to get from you guys before this ends is

1:15:00.892,1:15:06.589
how to continue this discussion inbetween IGFs.

1:15:06.589,1:15:08.596
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I really appreciate your comments and we will go to

1:15:08.596,1:15:12.916
Vint and I'm also really, really heartened to hear the support for Core

1:15:12.916,1:15:17.664
Internet Values because within ISOC, we spent so much time talking

1:15:17.664,1:15:21.698
about it, that at some point, you could start to feel it is overdone, if you will, even

1:15:21.698,1:15:26.010
when you see evidence that in fact it's still needed, and more is needed.

1:15:26.010,1:15:27.964
So I appreciate that. Vint?

1:15:27.964,1:15:32.977
>> VINT CERF: So I have two suggestions, maybe three. In the Internet

1:15:32.977,1:15:39.129
Engineering Task Force, where working groups develop standards, one of

1:15:39.129,1:15:43.025
the tactics that's used to solve particular problems is to send a

1:15:43.025,1:15:47.900
design team out, maybe three or four people, not many more than that,

1:15:47.900,1:15:52.381
to work through the problem and make concrete propositions. We might

1:15:52.381,1:15:56.294
pick particular problems and have a design team approach to proposals

1:15:56.294,1:16:01.898
to solve them, or at least, proposals to approach them. Example,

1:16:01.898,1:16:06.047
Internet -- I'm sorry, intellectual property management, of course, is

1:16:06.047,1:16:11.356
a huge area, but the design team that tackles a conceptual framework

1:16:11.356,1:16:15.510
for dealing with that, in an online environment, might be a concrete

1:16:15.510,1:16:18.839
thing that could be done. I don't suggest that that's the only thing. I'm

1:16:18.839,1:16:24.989
picking that as an example. The other thing which I find extremely

1:16:24.989,1:16:29.351
appealing is this notion of Internet Governance movement. Somehow sometimes

1:16:29.351,1:16:34.796
the words capture exactly what you want and this is not a point

1:16:34.796,1:16:39.164
solution thing. This is a continuous process.

1:16:39.164,1:16:44.366
And in the case of core values, this Internet Governance movement, I

1:16:44.366,1:16:47.453
would interpret to mean the preservation, a movement to preserve the

1:16:47.453,1:16:51.636
values that have made the Internet what it has been, and what it

1:16:51.636,1:16:57.102
should be in the future. So I like the term very much and I appreciate

1:16:57.102,1:17:06.106
you introducing that meme into our intellectual universe. There was

1:17:06.106,1:17:10.874
one other very practical thing to suggest. Google+ has a service

1:17:10.874,1:17:15.489
called hangouts, and if you have adequate access to Internet

1:17:15.489,1:17:19.034
bandwidth, hangouts turn out to be a pretty convenient way to have a

1:17:19.034,1:17:22.713
design team discussion even if you are not physically in the same place.

1:17:22.713,1:17:27.553
>> SIVASUBRAMANIAN MUTHUSAMY: That is a limitation of ten users, and

1:17:27.553,1:17:29.171
so..

1:17:29.171,1:17:31.399
>> VINT CERF: But that's why I said design team, which typically has

1:17:31.399,1:17:33.469
three to four.

1:17:33.469,1:17:37.312
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I think he was trying to give you a product

1:17:37.312,1:17:41.495
message. (laughter)

1:17:41.495,1:17:46.535
Before we -- I want to go around once more, giving preference to those

1:17:46.535,1:17:49.931
who have'nt spoken so much, so Sébastien has asked for some comments,

1:17:49.931,1:17:56.435
and I think Paul, Alejandro, Nick, closing comments?

1:17:56.435,1:18:01.402
>> SÉBASTIEN BACHOLLET: Yes, it's a comment on the comments you made

1:18:01.402,1:18:07.997
about the Internet Forum, and the fact that you start to be involved

1:18:07.997,1:18:11.583
at the national level and the regional level before to come to the

1:18:11.583,1:18:16.847
international one. It's interesting because the IGF was created the

1:18:16.847,1:18:22.378
other way round. It was created not bottom up, but top down, and --

1:18:22.378,1:18:31.549
and even at the beginning, it was very difficult to make understood

1:18:31.549,1:18:37.079
that we need regional and national IGF, and it's still not understood

1:18:37.079,1:18:42.750
everywhere. In France, there's no IGF at all. And I don't see when

1:18:42.750,1:18:48.401
it will be. Then it's interesting the way it was done and the way you

1:18:48.401,1:18:56.261
leave with. But I would like to take as a very good suggestion that,

1:18:56.261,1:19:04.747
how we can, under this subject, in each and every IGF, and not just

1:19:04.747,1:19:08.097
traveling because it's quite complicated, but people who could be

1:19:08.097,1:19:11.497
involved like you in your country or in your region, and with the

1:19:11.497,1:19:16.724
tools we can have to be in remote participation on that

1:19:16.724,1:19:23.459
subject. I think if we can globalize this local intervention, it will

1:19:23.459,1:19:26.433
be a good way to go. Thank you.

1:19:26.433,1:19:31.668
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Sébastien. Anyone else?

1:19:31.668,1:19:40.504
>> PAUL WILSON: Final remarks. Well, I think the suggestion with

1:19:40.504,1:19:43.352
reference to the regional and national IGFs is really well put. And I

1:19:43.352,1:19:48.628
think this kind of -- the ongoing process that's implied by Dynamic

1:19:48.628,1:19:54.027
Coalition is a really good one for linkage at the regional and

1:19:54.027,1:19:57.478
national levels. And, come to talk of that, there was recently an

1:19:57.478,1:20:01.397
Australian IGF, which had a really nice session - a little too

1:20:01.397,1:20:04.194
ambitious as it happened for the time available, but it was a really

1:20:04.194,1:20:09.182
nice approach to Internet values, which started with a brainstorming

1:20:09.182,1:20:13.308
on what are the aspects of the Internet that we believe are

1:20:13.308,1:20:17.078
fundamental, and which we either take for granted, as I mentioned

1:20:17.078,1:20:22.578
before, or which we would regret if we lost.

1:20:22.578,1:20:26.791
And I think that's a really interesting approach, but one of the --

1:20:26.791,1:20:30.449
one of the sort of problems I guess I had with the process was that it

1:20:30.449,1:20:33.727
was a little bit overly expansive for me. So it tended to capture

1:20:33.727,1:20:36.949
everything that we wanted out of the Internet, whether freedom of

1:20:36.949,1:20:39.682
speech was on the list, I'm not sure, but it was sort of -- it could

1:20:39.682,1:20:46.035
have been, the way, with that brainstorming approach. And I think the

1:20:46.035,1:20:49.377
powerful term there is a word I learned to spell during WSIS which is

1:20:49.377,1:20:53.766
subsidiarity, and it's this idea, that the solution to any given

1:20:53.766,1:20:57.284
problem is best located closest to that problem. It doesn't mean

1:20:57.284,1:21:02.067
geographical actually. I'm just recalling that Roham Samarajiva made

1:21:02.067,1:21:05.308
this statement that international treaties should be limited to what

1:21:05.308,1:21:09.171
they, and they alone, need to do. Which is also a statement of

1:21:09.171,1:21:11.817
subsidiarity. So if we are talking about Internet principles I'd

1:21:11.817,1:21:15.245
like to suggest to bear that in mind and to be really looking at what

1:21:15.245,1:21:19.146
fundamental to the Internet, not to do with our expectations and our

1:21:19.146,1:21:22.602
higher aspirations, out of the Internet. Because we kind of know

1:21:22.602,1:21:27.795
that's unlimited, really, but to look at it from that point of view,

1:21:27.795,1:21:32.534
and maybe that's something that an exercise, in the meantime, or

1:21:32.534,1:21:38.047
through linkage to regional, national, IGFs we could look at. Thanks.

1:21:38.047,1:21:40.313
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Some very interesting comments, as well Alejandro,

1:21:40.313,1:21:44.294
or Nick, any quick closing comments before people need to run?

1:21:44.294,1:21:51.094
>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: Very briefly, I think the point of subsidiarity

1:21:51.094,1:21:57.328
is very well put by Paul. We must make form follow function. In many

1:21:57.328,1:22:02.413
countries raising a national IGF brings a number of metaphors. It's

1:22:02.413,1:22:07.613
like kicking a sleeping dog while you are raising a high antenna under

1:22:07.613,1:22:11.544
a thunderstorm and painting yourself a target, and a few more of

1:22:11.544,1:22:16.542
those, but it's really not necessarily a desirable thing. You have to

1:22:16.542,1:22:20.412
find the tactic that's locally appropriate.

1:22:20.412,1:22:26.074
I do take very seriously, the excitement and the enthusiasm, the wiki

1:22:26.074,1:22:29.795
actually already exists. We have to -- I take responsibility, I

1:22:29.795,1:22:33.593
guess, together with Siva, to activate it and make it known, and make

1:22:33.593,1:22:37.212
it available for you to contribute, and we have a mailing list that we

1:22:37.212,1:22:42.775
will include you in and make more active. All the things exist and I'm

1:22:42.775,1:22:47.277
committing to you to put a lot of effort into making it continue,

1:22:47.277,1:22:51.163
and be of service, and be actually fed by everybody.

1:22:51.163,1:22:55.214
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Nick? And just one quick comment, you can actually

1:22:55.214,1:22:57.445
get to the Dynamic Coalition from the IGF home page on the left-hand,

1:22:57.445,1:23:00.311
and we will make sure that you can get easy access to the list and

1:23:00.311,1:23:03.114
that sort of information from there as well.

1:23:03.114,1:23:05.212
>> NICK ASHTON-HART That was going to be my question is do we want

1:23:05.212,1:23:07.814
it, like, people to give an address or something, who want to get on

1:23:07.814,1:23:11.009
the mailing list, or is it easier to just go to the IGF website or

1:23:11.009,1:23:14.426
something?

1:23:14.426,1:23:19.459
>> SIVASUBRAMANIAN MUTHUSAMY: What you could do is you can all give me

1:23:19.459,1:23:21.820
your cards and I'll straight away, by today evening, I will send you a mail

1:23:21.820,1:23:28.019
giving you the link to the mailing address, or sending you an invitation

1:23:28.019,1:23:31.285
to the mailing list straight away.

1:23:31.285,1:23:37.034
>> VINT CERF: I'm having a small cognitive dissonance right now. And

1:23:37.034,1:23:41.201
the reasaon is that, we were talking about trying to move away from

1:23:41.201,1:23:45.073
nation state, sovereignty and everything else. So why do we think

1:23:45.073,1:23:49.497
that we have to have national and regional IGFs? Why aren't we

1:23:49.497,1:23:54.180
talking about people who are -- have common interests, no matter where

1:23:54.180,1:23:57.206
they happen to be and the organizing principle is not where you are,

1:23:57.206,1:24:00.471
but what you think and what you are interested in.

1:24:00.471,1:24:04.065
>> PAUL WILSON: It has to do with travel costs. (Laughter)

1:24:04.065,1:24:05.997
>> VINT CERF: No, that's why we use the Internet to in order to do this in the

1:24:05.997,1:24:07.016
first place.

1:24:07.016,1:24:09.164
>> PAUL WILSON: But Google hangout only allows ten people at once.

1:24:09.164,1:24:12.633
>> VINT CERF: Well, so, that's what a design team's all about.

1:24:12.633,1:24:17.147
And besides which, there's also On-The-Air version which allows a bazillion people to

1:24:17.147,1:24:19.396
listen in while the other ten are talking to each other.

1:24:19.396,1:24:21.450
>> PAUL WILSON: I knew you'd have an answer.

1:24:21.450,1:24:24.580
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So I actually think we need both obviously. There

1:24:24.580,1:24:27.698
are some discussions that are really well advanced local level, local

1:24:27.698,1:24:31.235
language, really particular, you can take it to the concrete, and

1:24:31.235,1:24:34.692
then you can actually use that to move forward and drive action. And

1:24:34.692,1:24:38.467
yet there's an awful lot of learning that happens in broader forums

1:24:38.467,1:24:41.286
and exchange of best practices and thoughts and your ideas are

1:24:41.286,1:24:44.841
enriched. So I think there's a lot of value in both of them. And I

1:24:44.841,1:24:48.487
think that's actually one of the good things about the global IGF, if

1:24:48.487,1:24:52.920
that's what we are calling it and a whole host of different types of

1:24:52.920,1:24:56.750
forum, whether it's a national IGF or it's some workshop, you know,

1:24:56.750,1:25:01.535
it's about discussion, communication and exchange of ideas. We are a

1:25:01.535,1:25:04.464
little over time. I would like to thank the remote participants for

1:25:04.464,1:25:12.651
hanging in there. I'm sure this isn't nearly as robust or enriching

1:25:12.651,1:25:17.156
an activity as when you are in the room. And I see one comment back

1:25:17.156,1:25:25.466
here from --

1:25:25.466,1:25:30.948
>> REMOTE MODERATOR: Just one comment to the recent comment of Mr.

1:25:30.948,1:25:43.140
Cerf, from a remote participant. Seth Johnson says, the general

1:25:43.140,1:25:47.602
purpose nature of copyright comes from the inherent flexibility of

1:25:47.602,1:25:52.465
information, once it's published. This is reflected in the fact or

1:25:52.465,1:25:57.957
idea versus expression dichotomy. You don't really deal with the

1:25:57.957,1:26:02.835
nature of copyright online, if you just talk about works as bags of

1:26:02.835,1:26:10.405
bits. So I think this is a question. Why is sovereignty strictly

1:26:10.451,1:26:15.527
limited to rights? People assert their rights via local

1:26:15.578,1:26:20.155
sovereignties. It's a matter of recognizing that the people must rely

1:26:20.155,1:26:25.606
on that for rights, versus the broader oversight the nation states

1:26:25.606,1:26:30.425
attempt. So it was a comment, general.

1:26:30.425,1:26:37.278
>> VINT CERF: If you want me to respond, one thing I need to respond, one thing I need to point out is that

1:26:37.278,1:26:42.796
the bag of bits is not static, necessarily. Because if it's a piece

1:26:42.796,1:26:46.149
of software, or if the bits need to be interpreted by a piece of

1:26:46.149,1:26:51.984
software, it's a very dynamic thing. So if the criticism, or comment, is that the

1:26:51.984,1:26:57.668
bag of bits is similar to a book or other static object, I don't believe that

1:26:57.668,1:27:03.549
they have to be. They cab extremely dynamic kinds of elements.

1:27:03.549,1:27:06.194
>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I wasn't forcing you to respond but I always like

1:27:06.194,1:27:11.221
your responses. So I'd also like to thank everyone here in the room,

1:27:11.221,1:27:14.305
particularly for being so engaged and I think some excellent questions

1:27:14.305,1:27:19.210
and suggestions. Obviously thank you to the panelists, and a very big

1:27:19.210,1:27:22.406
thank you to Siva as well. As I said, he really has been, as

1:27:22.406,1:27:26.676
Alejandro has said, the person who has kept actually kind of this

1:27:26.676,1:27:29.627
alive from forum to forum. So I would like to give everybody a round

1:27:29.627,1:27:33.627
of applause and thank you very much. (Applause)