Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Workshop at IGF 2012
-
0:02 - 0:05>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I would like to welcome everybody to the Dynamic
-
0:05 - 0:08Coalition on Internet values. We do have one or two panelists that
-
0:08 - 0:12will actually join us a little bit late. Dr. Cerf should be here in
-
0:12 - 0:17about 30 minutes or so. And I know we have remote participants as
-
0:17 - 0:22well. So just two or three minutes on this particular Dynamic
-
0:22 - 0:25Coalition and its history, and then we will ask the panelists to
-
0:25 - 0:28introduce themselves and respond to a question which I will actually
-
0:28 - 0:31pose in a moment .
-
0:32 - 0:34But this particular Dynamic Coalition came out of a workshop on the
-
0:34 - 0:37fundamentals, particularly around the Core Internet Values, which was
-
0:37 - 0:43held back in 2009 in Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt. And then following
-
0:43 - 0:47that workshop a Dynamic Coalition was established and there have been
-
0:47 - 0:54two other presentations since that time, one at the IGF in Vilnius and
-
0:54 - 0:58another at the IGF in Nairobi.
-
0:58 - 1:02This is the third meeting of the Dynamic Coalition, and one of the
-
1:02 - 1:06things we want to come out of this meeting with is really trying to be
-
1:06 - 1:10quite concrete about some next steps and some work. The purposes of
-
1:10 - 1:13the Dynamic Coalition are to actually do work between meetings.
-
1:13 - 1:19Largely remotely. There's an awful lot of work being done on Core
-
1:19 - 1:23Internet Values in various parts of Internet ecosystem. But I think
-
1:23 - 1:25we'd like to try to define whether or not there's something specific
-
1:25 - 1:30we want to do here, particularly in the multistakeholder format.
-
1:31 - 1:36So the Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values was actually
-
1:36 - 1:43organized to debate questions such as what makes the Internet what it is?
-
1:43 - 1:46What are its architectural principles? What are some of its core
-
1:46 - 1:49principles and values and what's happening to them in the process of
-
1:49 - 1:51Internet's evolution?
-
1:51 - 1:56So specifically, when we talk about core values and principles, the
-
1:56 - 1:59things we often quote are openness, transparency, collaborative
-
1:59 - 2:09processes, bottom up, local processes such as that embodied in the RIR
-
2:09 - 2:15process and, of course, the distributed nature which is central to how
-
2:15 - 2:20a lot of the work actually gets done across the Internet ecosystem.
-
2:21 - 2:25So over time, some of those principles and values have been
-
2:25 - 2:33threatened, I guess, sometimes, you know, perhaps less intentionally
-
2:33 - 2:38in terms of trying to address or solve some problem without clear
-
2:38 - 2:41understanding of the impact it actually has on the Internet, other
-
2:41 - 2:46times we could probably ascribe more intent to some of those actions.
-
2:47 - 2:50Before I do that I want to ask each one of the panelists to take a
-
2:50 - 2:52moment to introduce themselves. In particular, I would like a quick
-
2:52 - 2:58reflection on whether or not they think the Internet principles are
-
2:58 - 3:02alive and well. Are they thriving or are they under some level of
-
3:02 - 3:09threat for lack of a better word? So I will turn to my right and I'd
-
3:09 - 3:12actually like to thank Siva as well. Because Siva was actually the
-
3:12 - 3:17driver and the instigator behind the very first workshop, and has been
-
3:17 - 3:22central to the other two and was very central and the driving force
-
3:22 - 3:25behind this particular workshop. So it's really to Siva that we
-
3:25 - 3:28actually owe all of us being here today.
-
3:28 - 3:35One final comment, while I am with the Internet Society and a number
-
3:35 - 3:38of the people on this panel here are Internet Society members, this is
-
3:38 - 3:43not an Internet Society workshop, panel, or Dynamic Coalition. The
-
3:43 - 3:48Dynamic Coalitions are definded by having members from a minimum of
-
3:48 - 3:53three different multistakeholder communities. So if I say 'we', I am
-
3:53 - 3:58doing my best to say that 'we' in the context of what we are here as a
-
3:58 - 4:02Dynamic Coalition, not specific to an ISOC set of activities or an
-
4:02 - 4:08ISOC kind of ownership, if you will for this paticular idea. We all
-
4:08 - 4:11own the Core Internet Values. So Siva?
-
4:12 - 4:22>> SIVASUBRAMANIAN MUTHUSAMY: Thank you, Lynn. I'm Sivasubramanian, I
-
4:22 - 4:26serve as the president of Internet Society India Chennai, which is
-
4:26 - 4:33also an ICANN At-Large Structure. I'm from India and that's in brief
-
4:33 - 4:39about me and responding to the question by Lynn, I think Internet core
-
4:39 - 4:44values are under a serious threat and a lot of things that are
-
4:44 - 4:48happening all around us, a lot of changes, a lot of regulations that
-
4:48 - 4:55are proposed, a lot of legislations underway - they seek to threaten,
-
4:55 - 4:59to alter the core values considerably.
-
4:59 - 5:06And in my opinion, a lot of these changes are happening quite
-
5:06 - 5:11unintentionally. It's not that governments want to alter core values
-
5:11 - 5:17intentionally, it is just that Internet is new to us and Internet is
-
5:17 - 5:23new to governments and there are several departments handling
-
5:23 - 5:28Internet. For example, in Germany, at least six different ministries
-
5:28 - 5:35deal with different policy functions related to Internet, and then
-
5:35 - 5:39France, there are roughly three ministries that handle different
-
5:39 - 5:44policy aspects of Internet and there are often not sufficient
-
5:44 - 5:47coordination between these ministries and it so happens that sometimes
-
5:47 - 5:54somebody in some department who does not quite sufficiently understand
-
5:54 - 5:59how Internet works tends to make some policy changes, some policy
-
5:59 - 6:05proposals, that end up being very, very harmful to the Internet and
-
6:05 - 6:07its core values.
-
6:08 - 6:11For example, we know that the government of India has been very, very
-
6:11 - 6:17positive, and the minister from India was here at this IGF - Minister
-
6:17 - 6:23Kapil Sibal - and he has understood Internet and he's understood how
-
6:23 - 6:27Internet Governance works and he has been very positive and was even
-
6:27 - 6:33saying that the term Internet Governance itself is an oxymoron and he
-
6:33 - 6:37was talking about Internet accountability and to that extent he was
-
6:37 - 6:41positive. He was reaching out.
-
6:41 - 6:44At the same time, somewhere else -- from somewhere else in India, a
-
6:44 - 6:53proposal was filed at the ITU that was very bad. I don't want to use
-
6:53 - 6:56a different language. I would simply say that the proposal was very,
-
6:56 - 7:03very bad. This is one example of how the lack of coordination between
-
7:03 - 7:07government departments give rise to some proposals that invariably
-
7:07 - 7:16end up threaten the Core Internet Values. So what the core values
-
7:16 - 7:25coalition and what the Internet institutions could do is to make sure
-
7:25 - 7:30that every corner of the policy making sphere understands how the
-
7:30 - 7:35Internet works. Once there's sufficient understanding of how the
-
7:35 - 7:39Internet works and how it has to evolve, I think most of the policies
-
7:39 - 7:42will be in the proper direction. Thank you.
-
7:43 - 7:48>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you Siva, that was very very clear. I'm just
-
7:48 - 7:51going to go direct through the panelists, because I really do want an
-
7:51 - 7:54exchange amongst the panelists and to invite the remote participation,
-
7:54 - 7:57and obviously the individuals here in the room as well. So the
-
7:57 - 8:01purpose of this runthrough was just to get a broad perspective of
-
8:01 - 8:04views. Sébastien Bachollet?
-
8:04 - 8:11>> SÉBASTIEN BACHOLLET: Thank you, Lynn, and thank you, Siva for
-
8:11 - 8:20organizing and supporting this Dynamic Coalition since its inception.
-
8:20 - 8:28I'm a member of ISOC and I am board member of ICANN. But I am not
-
8:28 - 8:32talking on behalf of any of those organizations.
-
8:32 - 8:38I want to follow what Siva just explained and push just a little bit
-
8:38 - 8:45further. It seems that in a lot of countries, whatever the type of
-
8:45 - 8:51political organization, democratic or not totally democratic, or not
-
8:51 - 8:56democratic at all, we end up with the same type of decision to make a
-
8:56 - 9:03law each time we have trouble with something that happened once on
-
9:03 - 9:12Internet. And we end up to add law to law to law, and, in fact, the
-
9:12 - 9:18situation will be better handled by the private sector, the civil
-
9:18 - 9:30society and in discussion, in finding some consensus discussion, and
-
9:30 - 9:39the fact that it's very often ending in the parliament where people
-
9:39 - 9:45are really not aware of what is happening. They take bad decision and
-
9:45 - 9:52then it's one element to threaten more the Internet as we knew it and
-
9:52 - 9:55as we would like to have it in the future. Thank you.
-
9:56 - 10:03>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Sébastien. Paul Wilson?
-
10:03 - 10:09>> PAUL WILSON: Hi. I'm from the organization APNIC, the Regional
-
10:09 - 10:13Internet Address Registry for the Asia-Pacific. So we're a member of the
-
10:13 - 10:19technical community, and have been for coming up to 20 years. We
-
10:19 - 10:23operate as a nonprofit, mutual community organization that has got
-
10:23 - 10:29this particular technical responsibility of managing IP addresses. And
-
10:29 - 10:33I guess because we are a predominantly technical organization, we have
-
10:33 - 10:36taken a fairly pragmatic and practical view of what we do. We know
-
10:36 - 10:41well what we have to do and we know technically how to do it and
-
10:41 - 10:45probably haven't spoken so much about the values, the vision of the
-
10:45 - 10:47values behind what we do.
-
10:48 - 10:51But I think, as years have gone by and particularly as we get into
-
10:51 - 10:57this much more complex world, that I think the IGF exemplifies, it's
-
10:57 - 11:01become more and more important to talk about our values, to have
-
11:01 - 11:04people understand what we as an organization are and I think it's --
-
11:04 - 11:10it can be said fairly reliably -- that movements and organizations
-
11:10 - 11:13that actually have values and vision to express are generally more
-
11:13 - 11:19successful than those that go from day to day on a -- just knowing
-
11:19 - 11:22simply what they do and how they do it.
-
11:23 - 11:26So we have been spending a bit of time on this, and I think the same
-
11:26 - 11:32thing I described actually goes to the Internet itself, that the idea
-
11:32 - 11:37of having identified, some identified vision and a set of values for
-
11:37 - 11:43the Internet gives us a very good, a very good idea, if down the track
-
11:43 - 11:47the Internet were to change, I mean, and that's what we are talking
-
11:47 - 11:49about here. We are talking about the way the Internet might evolve in
-
11:49 - 11:54future. I think of whatever network we are using in the future, it's
-
11:54 - 11:56going to be an IP-based network and we will call it the Internet but
-
11:56 - 12:00how would we know if the Internet 10 or 15 years down the track has
-
12:00 - 12:05become a different Internet from the one we enjoy today. It may not
-
12:05 - 12:09be so easy to tell, but it certainly helps if we have an idea of the
-
12:09 - 12:12values that are being supported and a vision of the Internet and how
-
12:12 - 12:18it is really intended by a consensus of us to operate.
-
12:19 - 12:25I think to -- the question that Lynn asked is whether the principles
-
12:25 - 12:30of the Internet, which I think we do need to enumerate, whether those
-
12:30 - 12:33principles are here with us today, and I actually think they are. I
-
12:33 - 12:36think the only reason why the Internet has been -- absolutely the only
-
12:36 - 12:40reason why the Internet has been so successful is because of values
-
12:40 - 12:45that are either implicit or explicit in the way it's been envisaged
-
12:45 - 12:48and the way it's run, and the Internet today is still thriving. The
-
12:48 - 12:53Internet growth is phenomenal. The growth of applications, of content,
-
12:53 - 12:57of usage and of the user base of the Internet is phenomenal. So
-
12:57 - 13:00today, today we are doing well. The question is whether tomorrow the
-
13:00 - 13:05Internet or as I said 10 or 15 years down the track the Internet might
-
13:05 - 13:11be on a path towards change that does damage those values and the
-
13:11 - 13:13success.
-
13:13 - 13:18So the values are things like the Internet as a single global
-
13:18 - 13:21accessible network that links every point of the Internet to every
-
13:21 - 13:25other point. The fact that it's a neutral network, where the actual
-
13:25 - 13:32infrastructure of the Internet, the Internet itself is separate from
-
13:32 - 13:36and can be separated from the applications and the content that run
-
13:36 - 13:40across it, whether the Internet continues to be open and accessible.
-
13:40 - 13:45These actually are -- these are values that I think we all actually
-
13:45 - 13:48understand these days and they are -- they are critical values. They
-
13:48 - 13:52are values which have been actually delivered to us and they have been
-
13:52 - 13:55enabled by the -- both the original design of the Internet and the way
-
13:55 - 13:59that it has been maintained.
-
13:59 - 14:03I mean, we tend to take these things for granted. As I said, the
-
14:03 - 14:05Internet is the Internet, and we just sort of think we know what it
-
14:05 - 14:08is. But in fact those things have not been delivered automatically or
-
14:08 - 14:15sort of magically by the Internet, they have been designed and they've been maintained. So there
-
14:15 - 14:19are numerous ways in which those values may or may not be served by
-
14:19 - 14:21developments.
-
14:22 - 14:26Over time, we might see a sort of fragmentation of the Internet down
-
14:26 - 14:30the track, and an increase in the complexity of the Internet down the
-
14:30 - 14:33track, where you have fragments of the Internet which have more
-
14:33 - 14:39complex interconnections between them than exist today. That could
-
14:39 - 14:44happen. That could be a result, for instance, of a failure over the
-
14:44 - 14:48next 10 years of IPv6 to be deployed, so at a technical level you get
-
14:48 - 14:52a fragmentation and a breakdown of the global nature of the Internet.
-
14:52 - 15:00It could also happen by political policies -- by policies, regulations being
-
15:00 - 15:03adopted that actually start to break the Internet up.
-
15:03 - 15:08The neutrality of the Internet, likewise, is something that could be
-
15:08 - 15:12threatened by various different factors, whether it's commercial
-
15:12 - 15:16decision making that becomes predominant and unregulated, whether it's
-
15:16 - 15:21other governmental or regulatory actions. I mean, the interesting
-
15:21 - 15:24thing about network neutrality is that the term didn't exist before
-
15:24 - 15:29the Internet at all. The term -- prior to the Internet, there was no
-
15:29 - 15:32such thing as a neutral network, because a network was provided by a
-
15:32 - 15:35telecoms carrier that bundled the transportation and the applications
-
15:35 - 15:42and everything you did into a stack of services and it was never
-
15:42 - 15:47neutral. It couldn't be neutral. So network neutrality, the ability
-
15:47 - 15:49to have a debate about network neutrality, no matter what your
-
15:49 - 15:55position on it is -- the privilege we have of having a debate about it is
-
15:55 - 15:58something that the Internet has delivered to us. And, once again,
-
15:58 - 16:02that is something that could be eroded and disappear so that we find
-
16:02 - 16:05ourselves technically unable, or for other reasons unable, to deliver
-
16:05 - 16:09a network that's neutral in the same way that the Internet is today,
-
16:09 - 16:13and that debate then becomes a thing of the past.
-
16:13 - 16:18So there's many aspects of this and I won't go on hogging the
-
16:18 - 16:23microphone, but I think the -- the Internet is thriving. The values
-
16:23 - 16:27are still with us. I think there are -- there are all sorts of
-
16:27 - 16:32circumstances, call them threats or inadvertent circumstances that
-
16:32 - 16:34might change or threaten the values that we have and I think it's
-
16:34 - 16:41really useful in this forum to be able to actually talk about them,
-
16:41 - 16:44identify them and help to understand how we would recognize if they
-
16:44 - 16:47disappeared or how we might help to avoid that from happening.
-
16:47 - 16:48Thanks.
-
16:49 - 16:54>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Paul, and that was actually a nice level
-
16:54 - 16:58and a nice thorough, sort of exposé of some of the Internet values. I
-
16:58 - 17:02actually can't see what the name tag says right to your immediate left
-
17:02 - 17:08and if it says -- okay, Désirée. Désirée was actually a tentative,
-
17:08 - 17:11and apologies on some of the flux on the panel here. There are a
-
17:11 - 17:14number of other workshops that are schedules in parallel and people
-
17:14 - 17:19are fighting over resources. Correct Olivier? So let's move to
-
17:19 - 17:21Alejandro.
-
17:22 - 17:30>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: Thank you Lynn. My name is Alejandro Pisanty, I
-
17:30 - 17:34am the chair of ISOC Mexico and a professor at the National University
-
17:34 - 17:42of Mexico. I'm not speaking on behalf of the University, and I'm very
-
17:42 - 17:46tentatively speaking on behalf of the chapter because this is work
-
17:46 - 17:47that will go back there.
-
17:48 - 17:53First, I want to join Lynn in embracing, enormously, the efforts of
-
17:53 - 17:57Sivasubramanian Muthusamy. He has kept the continuity of the effort in
-
17:57 - 18:01times that were of duress for many others of us and I'm enormously
-
18:01 - 18:10thankful and in recognition of what you have enabled us to achieve and
-
18:10 - 18:18achieved yourself. We really have a great debt of gratitude to you.
-
18:18 - 18:22It's hard to improve on what Paul Wilson has already said. I think
-
18:22 - 18:28that there's something to add, which is that these threats -- the
-
18:28 - 18:34threats that I see are very concrete. They are pervasive, they are of
-
18:34 - 18:39a permanent nature, and they are of a recurring nature. It's not only
-
18:39 - 18:44that some actors or some involuntary circumstances will continue to
-
18:44 - 18:49present, it's also that new actors and circumstances will continue to
-
18:49 - 18:57present. We can only not foresee when and how strongly a company will
-
18:57 - 19:01do something, including lobbying a government for legislation that
-
19:01 - 19:07actually interferes with network neutrality. That's one of the most
-
19:07 - 19:10visible threats right now. That will interfere with the end-to-end
-
19:10 - 19:15principle, or other of the technical principles. We don't know whether an
-
19:15 - 19:19apps developer will come up with something that becomes very popular
-
19:19 - 19:25and will actually breaking the openness and interoperability to which we
-
19:25 - 19:29have become used to. I think we have also become used to see the
-
19:29 - 19:35threats coming and we should be warned about them. That's my
-
19:35 - 19:39assessment about this general -- let's say, at the more technical
-
19:39 - 19:44level of the core principles and certainly the principles of
-
19:44 - 19:53collaboration, decentralization, the whole multistakeholder setup are
-
19:53 - 19:57also continuously both being built up and being threatened. When I
-
19:57 - 20:01see this kind of circumstance, my reflex now is to think of performing
-
20:01 - 20:06a risk assessment, which has to be very objective. It includes
-
20:06 - 20:12strengths and weaknesses. It includes threats that are very
-
20:12 - 20:15improbable, very unlikely but would be of very high impact, and
-
20:15 - 20:19includes classifying the threats by their impact and probability
-
20:19 - 20:25therefore, and to try to make a rational, assessment. I think there is
-
20:25 - 20:31an important space to do this in the format of a Dynamic Coalition, or
-
20:31 - 20:35a similar one, in the sense that many organizations that come together
-
20:35 - 20:40in different fora are able to perform some parts of this and we are
-
20:40 - 20:47able to crowdsource and bring in a more popular and open participation
-
20:47 - 20:50to these by individuals, small companies, small consultancies,
-
20:50 - 20:55government units, the whole multistakeholder gamut and that would be
-
20:55 - 21:02one possible task to perform that would grow on the competencies and
-
21:02 - 21:05strengths of the existing organizations and would add a lot more to
-
21:05 - 21:06the mix.
-
21:08 - 21:11>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Alejandro, excellent as ever and
-
21:11 - 21:16thankyou for repeating the thanks to Siva as well. Nick, I want to
-
21:16 - 21:18make sure that you really feel like you are a part of the panel and
-
21:18 - 21:21not sort of falling off the table there. So, if we need to move down a
-
21:21 - 21:26little bit, we'll scoot down. But please introduce
-
21:26 - 21:30yourself and give us your thoughts on the Internet values.
-
21:30 - 21:33>> NICK ASHTON-HART: Sure. Thank you very much Lynn and my thanks
-
21:33 - 21:37also to Siva for keeping the flame alight when there weren't many
-
21:37 - 21:42others to carry it and I'm glad to be here today. I'm Nick Ashton-
-
21:42 - 21:46Hart, I'm the Geneva Representative of the Computer & Communications
-
21:46 - 21:52Industry Association -- which has the privilege and the burden of
-
21:52 - 21:56being the only technology industry association that has a permanent
-
21:56 - 22:04presence in Geneva. So I get to watch the sometimes painful way in
-
22:04 - 22:10which struggles over the identity of the Internet play out in
-
22:10 - 22:14different aspects of international policy, be they at the ITU, or in
-
22:14 - 22:19the World Trade Organization, where there are negotiations on
-
22:19 - 22:23liberalizing services and in recognition that the openness of the
-
22:23 - 22:26Internet is of key economic importance to the future, interestingly
-
22:26 - 22:27enough.
-
22:28 - 22:32And there is -- I think there are values to the Internet, there's no
-
22:32 - 22:38question. The application of those values, I think is the difficult
-
22:38 - 22:44part. If you think of the Internet as a general purpose technology
-
22:44 - 22:46that affects everything, not just some things, the last, I think --
-
22:46 - 22:55probably the best example was the development of the steam engine in
-
22:55 - 23:02the 1800s. And if you think about that, before the steam engine came
-
23:02 - 23:07about, time was not synchronized. Every village in England had
-
23:07 - 23:14different time. The reason they had to create a common time was
-
23:14 - 23:18because of railway schedules. Railways which were made possible by
-
23:18 - 23:19the steam engine.
-
23:20 - 23:22People literally traveled by horses, and it took so long to travel
-
23:22 - 23:26between points you didn't need to have common time. And so you think
-
23:26 - 23:30of the total transformation in life of just changing from having
-
23:30 - 23:35village time to national time. And I think this is what the Internet
-
23:35 - 23:40is doing to the modern world. It's completely transforming everything
-
23:40 - 23:46about it, and not everyone wants to be transformed. Not everyone
-
23:46 - 23:49wants to see the same videos. Not everyone wants their nationals to
-
23:49 - 23:51see the same information.
-
23:51 - 23:59Human rights are recognized in pretty much every country but we would
-
23:59 - 24:05not recognize the application of those rights in many countries as being congruent with our
-
24:05 - 24:07concept of what those rights mean.
-
24:08 - 24:12And so I think the challenge is going to be to recognize that we need
-
24:12 - 24:16to have common understandings of the architecture of the Internet, and
-
24:16 - 24:20of its core characteristics which must be respected in order for it to
-
24:20 - 24:25be used for any purpose. While living with the fact that at times the
-
24:25 - 24:30application of norms, social norms to what people use the Internet for
-
24:30 - 24:36will vary widely, and there are societies which are not willing to
-
24:36 - 24:42accept a globalized concept of the individual at the same pace as
-
24:42 - 24:47others. Whether we like that or not, I think we are going to have to
-
24:47 - 24:51-- to recognize that people, different cultures, have a right to
-
24:51 - 24:57define their norms slightly differently even if we disagree with them.
-
24:57 - 25:02Because otherwise we will see the internet becoming balkanized, we will
-
25:02 - 25:07see private country networks like we are seeing in Iran and the like.
-
25:07 - 25:12And then we are all lessened by the result. I suspect that's a
-
25:12 - 25:20controversial conception. But I see -- at the moment, I see the way in
-
25:20 - 25:24which content is perceived and the way in which the network is being
-
25:24 - 25:30perceived as being conflated together. And the result is, it's easier
-
25:30 - 25:34for countries to say let's just turn off the connection, let's just create
-
25:34 - 25:40a firewall and attempt to remove what we don't like. It's not very
-
25:40 - 25:43successful doing that, as we've seen, because people in China find a
-
25:43 - 25:49way around that, freedom finds a way, and speech finds a way. But I
-
25:49 - 25:52think this is going to be a key challenge is -- is those countries
-
25:52 - 25:59which socially even have a consensus that say this is not something we
-
25:59 - 26:05are willing socially to see, or read, or hear. How are they to be able
-
26:05 - 26:10to feel comfortable with the globalized parts of the Internet that do
-
26:10 - 26:13work for them and for everyone else?
-
26:13 - 26:17This is going I think to be a key policy challenge, and an
-
26:17 - 26:20uncomfortable one for all of us who would like to see the
-
26:20 - 26:27democratizing, and levelling, characteristics of the Internet carried
-
26:27 - 26:31to every corner. It may take a little longer for that vision to
-
26:31 - 26:35become -- to become reality than we would like.
-
26:36 - 26:41>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Nick. I want to kind of moderate this
-
26:41 - 26:45in quite a light way. So I am going to first ask the panelists if
-
26:45 - 26:49anybody wants to react to Nick's comments. I think he was trying to
-
26:49 - 26:54elicit a response or a reaction there. Second, to ask if there's any
-
26:54 - 26:58other discussion the panelists would like amongst themselves, and I'm
-
26:58 - 27:03looking to see if this any a remote participation or questions from
-
27:03 - 27:07the audience. And I do see there's one back there. While we actually
-
27:07 - 27:13get a mic, could I see if there's anybody who wants to take up Nick's
-
27:13 - 27:17challenge on what he thought was a somewhat controversial statement?
-
27:18 - 27:25>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I'd rather see the audience.
-
27:25 - 27:29>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Sébastien actually wants.
-
27:30 - 27:37>> SÉBASTIEN BACHOLLET: Thank you. Yeah, to what Nick just expressed,
-
27:37 - 27:42I fully agree with him, but I am not sure if it's just the case of the
-
27:42 - 27:48democratic or not democratic country, it's also happening in the
-
27:48 - 27:56democratic country where there are -- decisions that are part of
-
27:56 - 28:04publications can't be on the internet, and that the open Internet,
-
28:04 - 28:13it's not anymore open, and when you have difficulty to -- to access to
-
28:13 - 28:19different publication, it's the start of censorship.
-
28:19 - 28:25Of course, we feel that it's more important when it's happening in
-
28:25 - 28:31some non-democratic regime but I would like to say it's more broader
-
28:31 - 28:35than just those country. Thank you.
-
28:37 - 28:42>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you. So there was a question from the
-
28:42 - 28:46audience, which we will go to and that will give me a moment to get
-
28:46 - 28:47Vint settled.
-
28:47 - 28:51>> COURTNEY RADSCH: Thank you. Can you hear me?
-
28:51 - 28:52>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Yes and could you introduce yourself as well?
-
28:53 - 28:55>> COURTNEY RADSCH: My name is Courtney Radsch, I am with Freedom
-
28:55 - 28:59House and also an academic writing my dissertation about cyber
-
28:59 - 29:03activism. And so I'm very interested by the last person's comments,
-
29:03 - 29:10I'm sorry I didn't catch your name -- Nick. You mentioned at the end
-
29:10 - 29:15about the efforts by Iran to create their own national Internet. We
-
29:15 - 29:20see this very much across the world as regimes are learning from each
-
29:20 - 29:27other, et cetera, but I was fascinated by your example of time and how
-
29:27 - 29:30that developed out of the steam network. And time does not belong to
-
29:30 - 29:35any countries, right? The countries not sovereignty over time. So why
-
29:35 - 29:40do we not conceive of the Internet as something, why are we -- let me
-
29:40 - 29:45rephrase that -- why are we conceiving of the Internet based on
-
29:45 - 29:50sovereign nation state boundaries? Doesn't the Internet hold the
-
29:50 - 29:55potential along with other trends such as the power of multinational
-
29:55 - 30:01corporations and the power of individuals to connect across borders,
-
30:01 - 30:05hold the potential for conceiving of a different set of organizing
-
30:05 - 30:11principles outside of nation state sovereignty? And I think that it
-
30:11 - 30:14would be interesting to hear at this forum if we can get beyond this
-
30:14 - 30:19idea of the nation state. It concerns me both from a human rights
-
30:19 - 30:23perspective, but also as an individual who has grown up with the
-
30:23 - 30:28Internet, that we are still conceiving of the Internet and its rules
-
30:28 - 30:33as being governed by states and that they should still get to govern -- they govern
-
30:33 - 30:38their citizens so we don't care what they do inside of their borders,
-
30:38 - 30:40but online, we have the potential to have something different. I
-
30:40 - 30:43would love for us to think about, how do we make that possible?
-
30:44 - 30:49>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So thank you. That's also a very -- I'm lacking a
-
30:49 - 30:52word this late in the day -- question. But let me first go to Nick
-
30:52 - 30:55because the question was specifically directed to him, and then we'll
-
30:55 - 30:58ask Vint to come in and add any comments he'd like to to the last
-
30:58 - 31:03comment. We actually started this discussion with some discussion on
-
31:03 - 31:07the Core Internet Values and the question - are they alive and well, are they under
-
31:07 - 31:08threat?
-
31:09 - 31:12>> NICK ASHTON-HART Well, I would say, you know, can we move to a
-
31:12 - 31:16conception that is not based on the old, centuries old, concept of
-
31:16 - 31:19sovereignty. I certainly hope that's true. I certainly hope that's
-
31:19 - 31:23true. In fact, I think it's inevitable that we will do. I think you
-
31:23 - 31:27already see social constructions which on the Internet, which are not
-
31:27 - 31:32boundary related. They are bounded by what people identifying with
-
31:32 - 31:36other people that are perceived to be like them, which is a more human
-
31:36 - 31:42construct than a physical border. But just like it wasn't overnight
-
31:42 - 31:47that people said well, I'm going to give up my concept of time in my
-
31:47 - 31:51village, and agree on a national or international concept of time. It
-
31:51 - 31:53actually took a little while.
-
31:53 - 31:57There's some interesting books on it. It was quite controversial and
-
31:57 - 31:59people felt very strongly about this. They felt if they gave up the
-
31:59 - 32:06ability to determine what time it was, they were giving up their
-
32:06 - 32:11concept of the world in a real visceral way. This is why you still
-
32:11 - 32:14have daylight savings time and this kind of stuff. We've -- in two
-
32:14 - 32:18and a half centuries, we haven't totally disposed of this. We are still
-
32:18 - 32:23changing the time in the summer because of the perception of people
-
32:23 - 32:26who wake up early in agrarian environments.
-
32:26 - 32:33So, I hope, and I believe, that that vision -- we will get to that vision.
-
32:33 - 32:37All I'm saying is I think we may have to be patient. It may take some
-
32:37 - 32:41time for social constructions to catch up with a boundaryless world.
-
32:41 - 32:43That's all.
-
32:43 - 32:47>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So Vint, if you could also just say a word or two to
-
32:47 - 32:50introduce yourself. I am sure you are known to everybody here, but
-
32:50 - 32:52when people look back at these archives in 10, 20, 30 years,,
-
32:53 - 32:56>> VINT CERF: They will wonder who was that bearded, ancient person.
-
32:56 - 33:00Hello, I'm the talking dinosaur on the panel. My name is Vint Cerf,
-
33:00 - 33:06I'm Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist at Google. The
-
33:06 - 33:10question that you've raised is one which I have recently become
-
33:10 - 33:16intensely interested in, thanks to two things that have happened in
-
33:16 - 33:19literally the last few days, partly a consequence of this Internet
-
33:19 - 33:26Governance Forum. Bertrand de La Chapelle, who is probably known to
-
33:26 - 33:31you, is the 21st century reincarnation of an 18th century French
-
33:31 - 33:38philosopher. And he gives us much to think. He says that the notion
-
33:38 - 33:44of sovereignty in a highly connected environment may have to change
-
33:44 - 33:50because actions taken on the sovereign grounds may have impact on
-
33:50 - 33:57others outside of the territory of that sovereign domain. He gives an
-
33:57 - 34:01analogy where river is flowing through country A and country A chooses
-
34:01 - 34:06to pollute the river just as it leaves the borders of country A and
-
34:06 - 34:11flows into country B visiting all kind of serious and deleterious
-
34:11 - 34:13results on country B.
-
34:14 - 34:22The gentleman Minister from India, Mr. Sibal, made a rather bold
-
34:22 - 34:26statement that sovereignty was dead and that the concept of
-
34:26 - 34:32sovereignty was no longer appropriate in the Internet environment.
-
34:32 - 34:37I'm not quite prepared to give up all notions of sovereignty but I
-
34:37 - 34:41will tell you, and remind you, that John Perry Barlow wrote an
-
34:41 - 34:47interesting manifesto about the online environment of cyberspace. I
-
34:47 - 34:54can't reproduce it literally, but it basically said the cyberspace is
-
34:54 - 34:59a different universe and you governments can butt out. I don't think
-
34:59 - 35:04we can quite get away with this yet, and here's why. If we want to
-
35:04 - 35:10adopt a non-national kind of environment in the Internet, we have to
-
35:10 - 35:16emulate at least some of the protections that are given to us under
-
35:16 - 35:22the notion of sovereign social contract. We expect the governments to
-
35:22 - 35:27protect the citizenry. We actually give up some of our freedoms in
-
35:27 - 35:33exchange for safer environment. When we are harmed we expect that the
-
35:33 - 35:40state will have set up processes so that we can recover from that harm.
-
35:40 - 35:46That the victim has recourse against the party perpetrating the harm.
-
35:46 - 35:53There are a variety of other social order elements that show up in
-
35:53 - 35:57this social contract. If we are going to move away from the
-
35:57 - 36:02mechanisms that sovereignty gave us, we will have to find a way to
-
36:02 - 36:06reincarnate something like that in the cyberspace environment, because
-
36:06 - 36:10if we don't then we will have no recourse against harms occurring to
-
36:10 - 36:16us in that space. So, this isn't to argue that sovereignty needs to
-
36:16 - 36:19be retained necessarily but it's an argument that something has to be
-
36:19 - 36:24introduced into the cyberspace environment that provides protections
-
36:24 - 36:30and assurances of safety for people who are using that space. And
-
36:30 - 36:32that may take some effort.
-
36:33 - 36:40>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Yes. And just while the mic is going to the young
-
36:40 - 36:44woman there? Are there any questions from the remote participants in
-
36:44 - 36:46queue? Not yet.
-
36:47 - 36:51>> COURTNEY RADSCH: So, I think that might be the case if we are
-
36:51 - 36:56talking about democracies, but I think if you look at North Korea, if
-
36:56 - 36:58you look at Burma before the transition, if you look at many
-
36:58 - 37:04authoritarian governments, there is no social contract, right? So we
-
37:04 - 37:08are talking about sovereignty, I think in the United States is very
-
37:08 - 37:13different, but the problem with this idea of national sovereignty is
-
37:13 - 37:18that means they get to control whatever they want to do over that
-
37:18 - 37:21population of the citizenry. And so, you know, when we are talking
-
37:21 - 37:25about the Internet, I think that looking at the nation state as being
-
37:25 - 37:28sovereign over these parts, I mean this is what's happening in Iran.
-
37:28 - 37:33That's why they can create their own Internet, same with Saudi Arabia
-
37:33 - 37:36being able to create only one Internet access point and control all
-
37:36 - 37:43Internet flows. And I disagree that we're definitely on the track towards
-
37:43 - 37:47getting above and beyond that notion, I think there's a very strong
-
37:47 - 37:52push back against that. And that there are many states, and democracies
-
37:52 - 37:56included, who are very much trying to maintain the traditional
-
37:56 - 37:59concepts of sovereignty. So I would just push back a little bit on that.
-
37:59 - 38:03>> VINT CERF: Let's keep pushing. I still want to debate with you.
-
38:03 - 38:09First of all, you seem to have avoided the point that I was trying
-
38:09 - 38:14to emphasize, which is that if we are going -- if it were, in fact,
-
38:14 - 38:17possible to create a uniform Internet, which we do not have for
-
38:17 - 38:23exactly the reasons you just outlined, but supposing we had one, we
-
38:23 - 38:26are still going to expect a kind of social contract in that environment. May
-
38:26 - 38:32I ask if you reject that? You want to be unsafe in the Internet? Is
-
38:32 - 38:34that what you are looking for?
-
38:34 - 38:36>> COURTNEY RADSCH: I think we would need multiple social contracts.
-
38:36 - 38:39I don't think there's going to be a single social contract.
-
38:39 - 38:41>> VINT CERF: Then you are going to have a really tough time
-
38:41 - 38:44figuring out how to deal with jurisdiction. You have a big problem. You
-
38:44 - 38:50are going to have to come back to the table with a design that does
-
38:50 - 38:53what you want it to do because right now I don't see it.
-
38:54 - 38:58I'm not disagreeing with the vision that you have necessarily, but I
-
38:58 - 39:02would posit that we are certainly going to need some kind of
-
39:02 - 39:06protections, you are saying maybe more than one. I don't understand
-
39:06 - 39:08how the jurisdictional questions get solved, but let's set that aside
-
39:08 - 39:12for a moment. The other side of the coin is reality, and that is that
-
39:12 - 39:16the Internet is constructed out of real things. It may be an ethereal
-
39:16 - 39:23space of concepts and abstractions, but it arises out of a real,
-
39:23 - 39:28physical system and the real physical system does lie inside of nation
-
39:28 - 39:32state boundaries, and unless we were going to do away from nation states which
-
39:32 - 39:35I don't think is likely to happen in the near term, they will have the
-
39:35 - 39:37ability to do a certain amount of control.
-
39:37 - 39:44So the attractive vision that you dangle in front of us is not
-
39:44 - 39:49necessarily reachable if there are -- if nation states as they exist
-
39:49 - 39:54today have the ability to control that virtual environment that --
-
39:54 - 40:01that you seek to instantiate. I don't know how to undo that either,
-
40:01 - 40:05no matter how hard we may work at special pieces of software to tunnel our
-
40:05 - 40:10way out of the traps that we might exist in. That is still an
-
40:10 - 40:17artifact and anything we can do, technically other people can
-
40:17 - 40:22interfere with. So I think we are a ways away from being able to
-
40:22 - 40:24realize that vision. But it's very important to recognize that, if we
-
40:24 - 40:27were to realize the vision, we'd still have to figure out how to
-
40:27 - 40:29make it the place that we want to live in.
-
40:30 - 40:34>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Vint and now Alejandro has asked to get
-
40:34 - 40:35into the queue.
-
40:36 - 40:43>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: Thank you, Lynn. Again, I'm a little bit
-
40:43 - 40:46uncomfortable with the radio format here.
-
40:46 - 40:49(Laughter).
-
40:49 - 40:53So this is Alejandro Pisanty speaking. I think this exchange points
-
40:53 - 41:00us in -- towards some of the things -- ways to do things, and things
-
41:00 - 41:03to attend to, that will be very productive for a group of interested
-
41:03 - 41:07people of all stakeholder groups. So I will go back first. This post-
-
41:07 - 41:13Westphalian regime which would look beyond -- let's say to have a lot
-
41:13 - 41:20more power and a lot more of life defined by life on the 'Net, instead
-
41:20 - 41:24of life determined by nation states has been pointed out long ago
-
41:24 - 41:28among others by Wolfgang Kleinwachter in the Internet Governance
-
41:28 - 41:33sphere, and long before that with utopian cyberspace visions of John Perry
-
41:33 - 41:38Barlow and many others. It has also been described by Manuel Castells
-
41:38 - 41:41as the Space of flows and it's something that we actually do know a
-
41:41 - 41:46lot about. And, of course, we know a lot about that and we know a lot about
-
41:46 - 41:49the limits that we find, the boundaries that we meet, and the walls
-
41:49 - 41:53against we bump, when we get to the nation states. And we know that
-
41:53 - 41:59some of the walls between nation states are a lot harder, and less
-
41:59 - 42:03porous, like some of the ones you mentioned. In a UN context like the Internet Governance
-
42:03 - 42:07Forum, we refrain from pointing out specific countries but
-
42:07 - 42:12innuendo and other rhetoric tricks allow you to know exactly who you
-
42:12 - 42:14are speaking about, even more.
-
42:14 - 42:26So, the way I see that this very valuable exchange feeds into the work
-
42:26 - 42:30of the Dynamic Coalition is very concrete. It's a very direct
-
42:30 - 42:37funneling. What we want to see happening over the next years is that
-
42:37 - 42:40the way the Internet continues to be built and expanded -- and it's
-
42:40 - 42:45not the way the Internet grows and expands, because that doesn't
-
42:45 - 42:48happen spontaneously -- it's people, companies, governments, technical
-
42:48 - 42:51organizations doing it. So, the way the Internet continues to be built
-
42:51 - 42:59and expanded has to be in such a way that it allows by design, or
-
42:59 - 43:05incentivates and invites by design to live more in the Space of flows,
-
43:05 - 43:11to live more to make more easy to have the -- those transnational
-
43:11 - 43:15flows that are easy to do, that are the low hanging fruit like the
-
43:15 - 43:19transfer of information, for example, communication, right to free
-
43:19 - 43:25speech, right to free association. These are easily available,
-
43:25 - 43:31compared to things like taxation or, as Vint mentioned, the ultimate
-
43:31 - 43:34social function of the monopoly -- the legitimate monopoly of force,
-
43:34 - 43:39that corresponds to protecting the citizens militarily or let's say,
-
43:39 - 43:44at a level of physical security. That's a harder wall to climb but we
-
43:44 - 43:49do want, is to make sure that the design with neutrality, with
-
43:49 - 43:53openness, with interoperability, with multistakeholder decentralized
-
43:53 - 43:58decision making, goes in the way of enabling these transnational
-
43:58 - 44:05global way of working against a trend which would enable more easily
-
44:05 - 44:10the national boundaries to prevail more strongly against even those
-
44:10 - 44:13things that you have already achieved to do in the Space of flows.
-
44:13 - 44:17That will tell us a lot of what we will have to be watchful for. If we
-
44:17 - 44:23see, as you mentioned national Internets, if we see layers of national
-
44:23 - 44:30Internets-like proposals to administrate the IPv6 addressing with
-
44:30 - 44:37national administration, if we see coercion or legal mandates to link
-
44:37 - 44:44IDNs to nationalized ccTLD management instead of the enlightened
-
44:44 - 44:49global ccTLD management we have, and that to do things like taxation,
-
44:49 - 44:54civil life expression, individuals registration, before speaking,
-
44:54 - 44:59anything that builds that platform, that would -- would have to cause
-
44:59 - 45:02an alarm to be sounded and action to be taken by those who can
-
45:02 - 45:06actually take action. I think that feeds very directly into the need
-
45:06 - 45:09for this Dynamic Coalition to exist and operate.
-
45:10 - 45:15>> VINT CERF: This is -- I'm sorry I don't mean to prolong this
-
45:15 - 45:20unnecessarily, but it occurs to me that if you look at this sort of
-
45:20 - 45:26utopian view of Internet, one thing you need to keep in mind is you
-
45:26 - 45:30are not your avatar. You are you. Your avatar is only a
-
45:30 - 45:34representation of you. The map is not the territory. And it's
-
45:34 - 45:41inescapable that the Internet is rooted in a physical world. So if we
-
45:41 - 45:47are going to move away from purely national boundaries for legal
-
45:47 - 45:51jurisdictions and the like, there will have to be at least some amount of
-
45:51 - 45:58multilateral or global agreement about social norms and at least legal
-
45:58 - 46:01norms that will allow abuses to be dealt with in this cyber
-
46:01 -environment.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Well, I have to thank you for the question. It's
-
Not Syncedobviously given rise to a lot of very interesting debate and I also
-
Not Syncedappreciate Alejandro I think starting to move the discussion forward
-
Not Syncedwith what might this Dynamic Coalition do going forward? Before we
-
Not Syncedpick that up, there was actually a question or a comment from a remote
-
Not Syncedparticipant.
-
Not Synced(No audio).
-
Not Synced>> REMOTE MODERATOR: Thank you very much. As a follow-up to previous
-
Not Syncedquestions, we got several questions from our remote participants.
-
Not SyncedFirst, a question was from Joly MacFie. As entertainment is
-
Not Syncedincreasingly delivered via content distribution networks, how does
-
Not Syncedthis affect peering arrangements and the end-to-end principle, as
-
Not Syncedusers access content rather than hosts?
-
Not SyncedThe next question was from the United States, from Marcus Ledbetter.
-
Not SyncedDo we all agree that this is just one Internet?
-
Not SyncedAnd the last one, was to Mr. Vint Cerf, balancing sovereignty,
-
Not Syncedopeneness, regulation, and national laws, seems to me a very tricky
-
Not Syncedjob to do. So my question to Vint Cerf, which body do you think would
-
Not Syncedhave the task to manage this complex task?
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: OK. Shall I try to answer the last one? Maybe this
-
Not SyncedDynamic Coalition is where that solution starts. Maybe this is a
-
Not Syncedgroup that can begin examining what's possible and what isn't. It's
-
Not Syncedpretty clear, though, if you are going to have international
-
Not Syncedagreements that create a kind of homologized legal framework, that
-
Not Syncedultimately you will have to go to bodies like the World Trade
-
Not SyncedOrganization, or the Worls Intellectual Property Organization, or
-
Not Syncedother parts of the UN -- or you are going to have to go to a
-
Not Syncedcollection of multilateral treaties in order to establish agreement.
-
Not SyncedI think we will probably end up starting with the lowest common
-
Not Synceddenominator, simple things. For example, what does a notarization
-
Not Syncedmean, and what's a digital signature mean, and does it have common
-
Not Syncedweight in all countries? We're going to have to build this up a
-
Not Syncedlittle bit at a time. I don't think there's one body that solves all
-
Not Syncedthe problems.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: There were two other questions that were posed.
-
Not SyncedOne was do we all agree there is one Internet and the other has to do
-
Not Syncedwith content and peer to peer and whether the impact on the end-to-
-
Not Syncedend.
-
Not SyncedSo I'm sure Vint's ready to jump in and respond to that. But is there
-
Not Syncedanyone else who wants to -- Nick, and then Paul.
-
Not Synced>> NICK ASHTON-HART This is Nick Ashton-Hart. So on the content
-
Not Syncedquestion, I'll take that one. I will be cursed for the rest of my life
-
Not Syncedin dealing with -- with copyrighted material and what happens to it,
-
Not Syncedgiven that I was a music manager for over 20 years, off and on. This
-
Not Syncedis the great -- this is a perfect example of the clash between
-
Not Syncedsovereignty law and the real world of the Internet and how it's really
-
Not Syncedused. The copyright system is a national system and it's implemented
-
Not Synceddifferent in different countries and yet cloud computing by its nature
-
Not Syncedmeans that you access the same resource, two different times in the
-
Not Syncedsame day and you are accessing multiple different servers in multiple
-
Not Synceddifferent countries on each of those occasions.
-
Not SyncedAnd the application -- how to deal with the legal issues there. There
-
Not Syncedhas been a treaty negotiation going on in Europe for 50 years to try
-
Not Syncedto determine how international law and private law, the law of
-
Not Syncedindividual countries, works together? And they have been unable to
-
Not Syncedagree this. This is an enormously thorny question. I think it's
-
Not Syncedcertainly true that the desire for enforcement has an impact on what
-
Not Syncedpeople can access. We can see that the iTunes store has different
-
Not Syncedmaterial at different times. And I do think we're going to have to
-
Not Syncedcome up with some way to internationalize the way in which rights --
-
Not Syncednational rights work in an international environment. There's going to
-
Not Syncedhave to be some way around that. It's not just for entertainment
-
Not Syncedcontentment but simply for the efficient functioning for services upon
-
Not Syncedwhich increasingly large amounts of the economy rely. Pfizer, one of
-
Not Syncedthe world's largest drug companies, recently transferred its entire
-
Not Syncedsupply chain and directed all of the vendors to a cloud-based system
-
Not Syncedso that they can see in realtime absolutely everything about their
-
Not Syncedproduct. Where they are being made, where they are being shipped,
-
Not Syncedwhere they are running out of them? This is going to become
-
Not Syncedincreasingly the case, and the more of the world that is integrated in
-
Not Syncedthat way, the more of which the conflicts of laws become very
-
Not Synceddifficult. There is going to have to be some conception of how laws
-
Not Syncedwork on the Internet. And I think the 50-year conversation will end
-
Not Syncedmuch sooner -- it won't take another 50 years because the commercial
-
Not Syncedrealities of dealing with this will require a pragmatic result that
-
Not Syncedwasn't required by the situation over the last 50 years. It was an
-
Not Syncedacademic discussion for 50 years because it could be. Now it's not
-
Not Syncedacademic anymore.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Nick. Paul?
-
Not Synced>> PAUL WILSON: I wanted to answer the question about one Internet in
-
Not Synceda slightly different way, and that's -- but it's a way that depends on
-
Not Syncedhow you define the Internet in asking the question. Because I used the
-
Not Syncedterm loosely before in terms of how, what would the Internet be like
-
Not Syncedin ten years down the track, and would it become a different Internet.
-
Not SyncedIn that case, the Internet's kind of everything, it's the universe
-
Not Syncedthat we are talking about. There's only just one of those. But if you
-
Not Syncedstart to drill down through that either through the level of users, or
-
Not Syncedcontent, or applications, then it's really -- the Internet is in the
-
Not Syncedeye of the beholder, and I think it's in all of those layers that we
-
Not Syncedstart to get confused in Internet Governance. What are we really
-
Not Syncedtalking about? There's the broad definition, there's the narrow
-
Not Synceddefinition. But actually speaking technically the Internet is the
-
Not Syncedtransport layer of the network that we are talking about. It's the
-
Not Syncedthing that I was referring to before that is the single global neutral
-
Not Syncednetwork that allows any point to connect to any other point, and
-
Not Syncedactually that thing is in its ideal form that we are all working to
-
Not Syncedpreserve. It is one network. And that is the beauty of it. So let's
-
Not Syncednot sort of mix up ourselves too much about saying which Internet we
-
Not Syncedare talking about, and yes there are many, or yes there are none,
-
Not Syncedbecause if you want to be quite specific about the Internet layer of
-
Not Syncedthe network that we all enjoy, the Internet layer is the transport
-
Not Syncedlayer. There has to be just one of those and it's really not a matter
-
Not Syncedof perspective, it really is -- is simply the technical infrastructure
-
Not Syncedand that is something that, as within this discussion about values, we
-
Not Syncedshould really identify, as I say, which Internet we are talking about
-
Not Syncedand be quite precise about that. Thanks.
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: So it's Vint again. I would like to make a small nuance
-
Not Syncedhere. We all understand that the Internet protocols don't necessarily
-
Not Syncedhave to be used in the global interconnected sytem. People have used
-
Not Syncedthese same prorocols to build private networks. But I don't consider
-
Not Syncedthose to be capital-I Internet, those are lowercase-I, clones that
-
Not Synceddon't have the same scope and probably have different intent. I
-
Not Syncedwanted to come back to this question of rights management and dealing
-
Not Syncedwith intellectual property in adigital environment. It occurs to me
-
Not Syncedthat, if we treat content as digital objects for just a moment, not
-
Not Synceddifferentiating what they are, whether they are books, novels or some
-
Not Syncedgame or some other thing, piece of software, just imagine them as bags
-
Not Syncedfull of bits.
-
Not SyncedAnd if we thought that it was possible to build mechanisms for access
-
Not Syncedcontrol to those bags of bits so there was some form of enforcement
-
Not Syncedfor access and use, if we thought it was possible to achieve that,
-
Not Syncedthen we might actually come to a general purpose solution to the
-
Not Syncedproblem of --that you were talking about, Nick.
-
Not SyncedAnd so, I think there may be technical mechanisms that might be
-
Not Syncedimplemented to make access to digital content, and digital objects of
-
Not Syncedall kinds, manageable. And here, if we were able to demonstrate that
-
Not Syncedyou could establish whatever terms and conditions you wished and these
-
Not Syncedare for access and use, and if those terms and conditions could really
-
Not Syncedbe enforced, technically enforced, then many of the problems that have
-
Not Syncedarisen in the national context of copyright, for instance, would
-
Not Syncedevaporate, and be assimilated into this more general system.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So I want to see if there are any remote
-
Not Syncedparticipants or anybody here in the audience who would like to either
-
Not Syncedfollow up or engage on any of the discussions to date or a new topic.
-
Not SyncedWe need a mic up here in the front row.
-
Not Synced(Silence)
-
Not Synced>> SUBI CHATURVEDI: Hi. My name is Subi Chaturvedi and I teach
-
Not Syncedjournalism and communication at Dehli University, and I run a
-
Not Syncedfoundation called Media for Change. We just put together one of the
-
Not Syncedfirst IGFs in India. I think it's been a fantastic experience just for
-
Not Syncedfor me to have been here and experienced this. But when we are
-
Not Syncedlooking at the core values of the Internet and there have been several
-
Not Syncedthreats that I've observed just now and the fact that we are having a
-
Not Synceddiscussion. I'm coming from a country which is India, and when we
-
Not Syncedtalk about access, diversity precedes access, and I do not think that
-
Not Syncedthe question of Internet as a physical layer that transports data.
-
Not SyncedBecause the Internet in India, per se has been an enabler, it's been a
-
Not Syncedfacilitator.it's meant different things to different people. And as,
-
Not Syncedprobably Susan would read things, it is not one thing but many, and
-
Not Syncedthen we are looking at core values.
-
Not SyncedI wanted Vint in particular to address this because I would slightly
-
Not Synceddisagree. The discussion on the Internet and the future of the
-
Not SyncedInternet has almost not been academic enough. On the contrary, it's
-
Not Syncedbeen in almost every space possible. I would on the other hand
-
Not Syncedsuggest that we need to institutionalize learnings both from the IGF.
-
Not SyncedIt's been a fantastic bottoms up approach. So there are two questions
-
Not Syncedthere because there's clearly -- and I'm putting this across in the
-
Not Syncedcontext of the ITU and the ITRs, we are looking at a situation where
-
Not Syncedwe could be writing binding, mandatory treaties. So what happens to
-
Not Syncedcore values such as permissionless innovation, openness, the idea of
-
Not Syncedputting together structures, the modularity of Internet. Because
-
Not Syncedclearly some of the issues that the -- the new ITRs are trying to
-
Not Syncedaddress are local, they're domestic. And then we are trying to bring
-
Not Syncedin questions like IP to IP interconnectivity to spaces such as those.
-
Not SyncedSo, my concerns are many and there are several threads and strains of
-
Not Syncedquestions. I don't even know if I have been able to articulate the
-
Not Syncedright thing but if some of the panelists could comment or take those
-
Not Syncedissues up, I'd be most grateful. Thank you.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I'm sure Vint"s in the queue,
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: Yeah, anybody else?
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Alejandro and Nick.
-
Not Synced>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: Thank you. And I will ask you for your name
-
Not Syncedlater for the record I am keeping. And I think that I am very glad to
-
Not Syncedhear that the discussion is not academic enough. At the same time that
-
Not SyncedI hear -- especially at the same time that I hear the discussion is
-
Not Syncedtoo academic. I think we are lacking. We are continuously lacking
-
Not Synceddiscussions in both senses. I think there's a dearth of academic --
-
Not Syncedsolid academic research and reflection, that has to expand the body
-
Not Syncedthat's already growing from many other angles, and on the other hand,
-
Not Syncedwe have to be able to take the knowledge, the informed opinion, that
-
Not Syncedwe are obtaining in the I -- from academic discussions down to -- to
-
Not Syncedthe questions as you have mentioned, how to institutionalize the
-
Not Syncedknowledge coming from the IGF without institutionalizing the IGF too
-
Not Syncedmuch, because that's one thing that we continuously want to -- I won't
-
Not Syncedsay to avoid, but to manage properly.
-
Not SyncedAnd, again, you mentioned what happens to the core values, things like
-
Not Syncedthe ITRs have the potential to crystallize or to -- yeah, or else I
-
Not Syncedwill keep it to that, to crystallize things that should continue to be
-
Not Syncedflexible, and that's the kind of permanent watch that probably a well
-
Not Syncedfunctioning Dynamic Coalition on Internet Core Values should be able
-
Not Syncedto at least report on and maybe deliver the appropriate calls for
-
Not Syncedaction.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So I'll go to Nick and Vint and in the last 15
-
Not Syncedminutes, that was an excellent series of questions, in the next 15
-
Not Syncedminutes I would like to go to what might this Dynamic Coalition
-
Not Syncedaddress going forward. The reason we keep coming back with these
-
Not Syncedworkshops is because we have interesting discussions like this and we
-
Not Syncedfind enough of interest to get us hooked. We get just now to take the
-
Not Syncednext step and be a little more concrete so we can actually keep it
-
Not Syncedlive between forums. So Nick?
-
Not Synced>> NICK ASHTON-HART: I will try and start on that with this. Your
-
Not Syncedquestions are excellent ones and it made me think that perhaps one of
-
Not Syncedthe answers is WCIT itself because, as Alejandro and others have
-
Not Synceddescribed, WCIT is designed to regulate the relationships that can
-
Not Syncedimpact the permissionless nature of interconnectiion, as you put it,
-
Not Syncedthe fundamental foundation of the Internet. That is why, I think,
-
Not Syncedthey have attracted such a visceral and strong response. And so it
-
Not Syncedoccurs to me that perhaps one of the things this coalition could do is
-
Not Syncedto try and articulate a vision for the fundamentals of the Internet,
-
Not Syncedand then recognize that people may take a different view about how
-
Not Syncedsocieties, not necessarily nation states, but how societies approach
-
Not Syncedinformation that is sent, differently than they approach the
-
Not Syncedimportance of preserving the free flow of data inherently, and the
-
Not Syncedinherent architecture of the Internet, so that it can work. I hope
-
Not Syncedthat's not true. I hope that people understand that you can't have
-
Not Syncedone without the other, but maybe we can start -- we can get a broader
-
Not Syncedconsensus if we start, saying how do we ensure the widest possible
-
Not Syncedaccess to the Internet, with the highest performance, at the lowest
-
Not Syncedcost, for the maximum number of people, on a permissionless basis,
-
Not Syncedsuch as we have enjoyed so far. So that we get as much the world
-
Not Syncedonline at the lowest cost possible, as a starting place, which is
-
Not Syncedobviously clearly happening as Internet access growth is exploding in
-
Not Syncedthe areas where it is least dense. Maybe that's not the right
-
Not Syncedsolution and you can all tell me I'm wrong but --
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Vint?
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: I don't think you're wrong, Nick. It's Vint. Let me
-
Not Syncedstart by asking you to think a little bit about how the Internet is
-
Not Syncedactually constructed. It is a layered architecture. I don't want to
-
Not Syncedmake that overly rigid or prescriptive, but it's helpful to think of
-
Not Syncedit as a layered architecture, and what happens is that, as you work
-
Not Syncedyour way up in the layers, you abstract from the behavior of the lower
-
Not Syncedlayers, you actually hide some of the details. And as a consequence of
-
Not Syncedthis abstraction going upwards, there are emerging properties that
-
Not Syncedcome out of those abstractions. And what is interesting about the
-
Not Syncedemergent properties is that as you get up to the point where you are
-
Not Syncedin the application space, you are in a universe that is very nearly
-
Not Syncedunbounded because it is an artifact of software. It is literally an
-
Not Syncedartifact of what the software -- how the software interprets the bits
-
Not Syncedthat it's moving around. The consequence of this notion of emergent
-
Not Syncedproperty is that the jurisdictional aspects of who is responsible for
-
Not Syncedwhat, how do you go about enforcing some particular practice might
-
Not Syncedvary from one layer to another, which is why, for example, we might
-
Not Syncedtolerate an ITR environment that's focused on the layers of physical
-
Not Syncedinterconnection, but we might not tolerate an ITR environment that
-
Not Syncedlooks up into the application space and says something about content
-
Not Syncedand what we can or can't say, or do.
-
Not SyncedSo I think we are going to have to keep in mind that order arising out
-
Not Syncedof this abstraction and emergent properties is going to vary from one
-
Not Syncedlayer to another.
-
Not SyncedSecond point, I think, is that the Internet has evolved successfully
-
Not Syncedover the last 30 years of its operation primarily because it's been a
-
Not Syncedregulation-free environment. Most of the decisions that get made are
-
Not Syncedfreely made among parties. The protocols that are invented and
-
Not Syncedadopted are a consequence of consensus in the IETF. The decision to
-
Not Syncedinterconnect or not, or even to build a piece of Internet, or to
-
Not Syncedchoose a particular piece of equipment, or a particular version of
-
Not Syncedsoftware is entirely open. And each individual operator chooses, even
-
Not Syncedyou do when you buy a router to put at home and build a Wi-Fi station,
-
Not Syncedyou make a choice. Nobody dictates to you anything except you should
-
Not Syncedbuy one that does the following things, because if you don't it won't
-
Not Syncedwork. It should do IPv6 now because you need IPv6, things like that.
-
Not SyncedSo I think that the one core principle that we don't want to lose, is
-
Not Syncedthat the relatively deregulated environment has allowed a lot of other
-
Not Syncedforces and incentives to choose a way forward for Internet to evolve.
-
Not SyncedPrescribing its evolution with a set of constraining treaty-like
-
Not Syncedagreements does not sound like, in the next 20 years, we would
-
Not Syncedreproduce what we have enjoyed in the last 20.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So I'm going to ask Siva to say some comments and
-
Not Syncedat the same time see if we can get a mic up here at the front. Because
-
Not SyncedFatima wants to come in after. And while we do that I will say that
-
Not Syncedthe small committee who was pulling the panel together obviously
-
Not Syncedfailed horribly in terms of gender balance. I'm extremely happy
-
Not Syncedthough that that the three questions we have had from the floor have
-
Not Syncedcome from the women in the audience. Thank you.
-
Not SyncedBut if you could get a mic over here for Fatima, while we go to Siva.
-
Not Syncedwe'll be able to move forward a little more quickly.
-
Not Synced>> SIVASUBRAMANIAN MUTHUSAMY: Actually there was supposed to be
-
Not Syncedgreater gender balance, Désirée was supposed to be here and I made
-
Not Syncedsome miscommunication error in communication and so she is not here.
-
Not SyncedI want to reflect on the suggestion by Nick Ashton-Hart. He was
-
Not Syncedtalking about the Coalition articulating a vision for the future of
-
Not Syncedthe Internet. And what we could do is bring together some of the most
-
Not Syncedbrilliant minds. Vint was talking about Beretrand, the 18th century
-
Not Syncedphilosopher being reincarnated in the 20th century. And I can think of
-
Not Syncedpeople withe diverse opinions, people like John Perry Barlow, Vint,
-
Not Syncedand some of the early founders of Internet, not only to think of
-
Not SyncedInternet as the layer, as it means to technical people, but to think
-
Not Syncedof Internet as what it means to the common man. It is -- it is much
-
Not Syncedbroader than the layer. It is much bigger than the layer, because
-
Not Syncedeverything for the common man.
-
Not SyncedAnd we want to articulate a vision for that Internet, put together
-
Not Syncedsome of the brilliant minds and come up with a vision and communicate
-
Not Syncedthat vision to governments, to other stakeholders so we start working
-
Not Syncedon it in the long term, and that is one of what I think we could do,
-
Not Syncedand it's open for corrections.
-
Not SyncedAnd the other thing we could to is have even between IGFs and not --
-
Not SyncedI'm not talking about only about events, some activity between IGFs.
-
Not SyncedIt could be an event. It could be -- it could be anything. It could
-
Not Syncedbe anything happening in different parts of world, one in New York,
-
Not Syncedone probably in Mexico, India, Pakistan, everywhere and so that way we
-
Not Syncedcan continue our activities and we could also expand participation in
-
Not Syncedour mailing list. These are some of my ideas and suggestions. And
-
Not Syncedit's for Lynn to think over and do it for the next one or two years or
-
Not Syncedmore.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: As somebody on my staff says, I think that was a
-
Not Syncedlateral pass to what he believes is a more nimble player! (Laughter).
-
Not SyncedI'm not sure the pass won't go back.
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: That's called delegating upwards.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I'm only doing what Siva tells me to do. Did you
-
Not Syncedhave any other comments, Vint, before we go to Fatima?
-
Not Synced>> FATIMA CAMBRONERO: Now? Ok, thank you. I'm Fatima Cambronero. I am
-
Not SyncedISOC ambassador, but I speak in my personal capacity. We are speaking
-
Not Syncedabout the bottom up processes and regarding to the future of the
-
Not SyncedDynamic Coalition, it's a suggestion, I think it would be a good idea
-
Not Syncedto do the outreach in the national and regional IGF, to get the input
-
Not Syncedof the community, the local and regional community, to grow well a
-
Not SyncedDynamic Coalition. Thank you.
-
Not Synced>> SUBI CHATURVEDI: I will just make a twitter comment. I couldn't
-
Not Syncedagree more with Siva when he mentions the fact that there should be
-
Not Syncedmore IGFs. You could call a rose by any name but you would want a
-
Not Syncedthousand flowers to bloom. One of the things that really concerns us
-
Not Syncedis that when you are looking at any -- because Internet has largely
-
Not Syncedbecome for us in this part of the world, public good. When you are
-
Not Syncedlooking at any policy that affects that, it has to be taken into
-
Not Syncedconsensus by multistakeholders and it has to, has to look at opinions
-
Not Syncedbecause it's going to affect our future. So that was one submission.
-
Not SyncedAnd the second was, we've had the Occupy Wall Street, we've had the
-
Not SyncedArab Spring. If you could look at this as an Internet Governance
-
Not Syncedmovement and not merely a forum and keep us all connected, because
-
Not Syncedthere are vulnerable communities, and I speak from the margins, and
-
Not Syncedmostly women and children are used as a peg by a lot of governments,
-
Not Syncedin a lot of spaces, for backhand regulation. So that must not happen.
-
Not SyncedAnd if we could somehow facilitate this process of engagement, and
-
Not Synceddisseminate the learnings, that becomes crucial because we celebrate
-
Not Syncedthis movement. We celebrate this opportunity but I do believe we owe
-
Not Syncedit to the universe, at the risk of sounding dramatic, to make sure we
-
Not Syncedpreserve what we have, which is ours. Thank you.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I'd sign up to follow you into that vision. In a
-
Not Syncedsecond. And we should certainly pull you into the steering committee,
-
Not Syncedif we can identify one as such.
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: Did you just delegate in the other direction there?
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Just pulling in multiple voices. This is a Dynamic
-
Not SyncedCoalition which is composed of multiple voices, multiple stakeholders,
-
Not Synceddrawn from different communities.
-
Not SyncedLet me see, is there anyone who wants to come in or that or any other
-
Not Syncedsuggestions? I know, we certainly have taken a number of
-
Not Syncedpossibilities away in terms of things we might go do more concretely,
-
Not Syncedand we will get you the mic back. And we'll take that away. There is a
-
Not Syncedmailing list open, so please join the mailing list, and let's see if
-
Not Syncedwe can identify some concrete activities. Yes, I know. Yes. We will go
-
Not Syncedto you and then we will go to Vint.
-
Not Synced>> COURTNEY RADSCH: Hello, so on concrete recommendations and
-
Not Syncedfollowing up on the comments, we were actually on a panel yesterday
-
Not Syncedabout national and regional IGFs. And I think for those of us who are
-
Not Syncedattending the international IGF for the first time, but who have also
-
Not Syncedattended the national ones, it is very unclear how are these related
-
Not Syncedand how do these feed into each other?
-
Not SyncedAnd I want to go -- you -- yes, so Subi, you have a very long name,
-
Not Syncedthe gentleman from India, mentioned what can we do inbetween. I mean,
-
Not Syncedone of these things could at least be to create a wiki or something
-
Not Syncedonline where some of the outcome documents, can be put online, and
-
Not Syncedmaybe have a discussion online. I think that having physical events
-
Not Syncedobviously produces barriers to participation, even though we do have
-
Not Syncedremote participation and that sort of thing. So I think there are
-
Not Syncedmultiple ways of doing that, and you know, the core values of the
-
Not Syncedinternet, ultimately, I think is one of the most important debates
-
Not Syncedthat's at hand. So this is a great opportunity.
-
Not SyncedAnd one thing I would like to get from you guys before this ends is
-
Not Syncedhow to continue this discussion inbetween IGFs.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I really appreciate your comments and we will go to
-
Not SyncedVint and I'm also really heartened to hear the support for the Core
-
Not SyncedInternet Values because within ISOC, we spent so much time talking
-
Not Syncedabout it, you could start to feel it is overdone, if you will, even
-
Not Syncedwhen you see evidence that it's still needed, and more is needed.
-
Not SyncedVint?
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: So I have two suggestions, maybe three. In the Internet
-
Not SyncedEngineering Task Force, where working groups develop standards, one of
-
Not Syncedthe tactics that is used to solve particular problems is to send a
-
Not Synceddesign team out, maybe three or four people, not many more than that,
-
Not Syncedto work through the problem and make concrete propositions. We might
-
Not Syncedpick particular problems and have a design team approach to proposals
-
Not Syncedto solve them, or at least, proposals to approach them. Example,
-
Not SyncedInternet -- I'm sorry, intellectual property management, of course, is
-
Not Synceda huge area, but the design team that tackles a conceptual framework
-
Not Syncedfor dealing with that, in an online environment, might be a concrete
-
Not Syncedthing that could be done. I'm not saying that's the only thing. I'm
-
Not Syncedpicking that as an example. The other thing which I find extremely
-
Not Syncedappealing is this notion of Internet Governance movement. Sometimes
-
Not Syncedthe words capture exactly what you want and this is not a point
-
Not Syncedsolution thing. It's a continuous process.
-
Not SyncedAnd in the case of core values, this Internet Governance movement, I
-
Not Syncedwould interpret to mean the preservation, a movement to preserve the
-
Not Syncedvalues that have made the Internet what it has been, and what it
-
Not Syncedshould be in the future. So I like the term very much and I appreciate
-
Not Syncedyou introducing that meme into our intellectual universe. There was
-
Not Syncedone other very practical thing to suggest. Google+ has a service
-
Not Syncedcalled hangouts, and if you have adequate access to Internet
-
Not Syncedbandwidth, hangouts turn out to be a pretty convenient way to have a
-
Not Synceddesign team discussion even if you are not in the same place.
-
Not Synced>> SIVASUBRAMANIAN MUTHUSAMY: That is a limitation of ten users, and
-
Not Syncedso..
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: But that's why I said design team, which typically has
-
Not Syncedthree to four.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I think he was trying to give you a product
-
Not Syncedmessage. (laughter)
-
Not SyncedBefore we -- I want to go around once more, giving preference to those
-
Not Syncedwho have'nt spoken so much, so Sébastien has asked for some comments,
-
Not Syncedand then Paul, Alejandro, Nick, closing comments?
-
Not Synced>> SÉBASTIEN BACHOLLET: Yes, it's a comment on the comments you made
-
Not Syncedabout the Internet Forum, and the fact that you start to be involved
-
Not Syncedat the national level and the regional level before to come to the
-
Not Syncedinternational one. It's interesting because the IGF was created the
-
Not Syncedother way round. It was created not bottom up, but top down, and --
-
Not Syncedand even at the beginning, it was very difficult to make understood
-
Not Syncedthat we need regional and national IGF, and it's still not understood
-
Not Syncedeverywhere. In France, there's no IGF at all. And I don't see when
-
Not Syncedit will be. Then it's interesting the way it was done and the way you
-
Not Syncedleave with. But I would like to take as a very good suggestion that,
-
Not Syncedhow we can, under this subject, in each and every IGF, and not just
-
Not Syncedtraveling because it's quite complicated, but people who could be
-
Not Syncedinvolved like you in your country or in your region, and with the
-
Not Syncedtools we can have to be in agreement and participation on that
-
Not Syncedsubject. I think if we can globalize this local intervention, it will
-
Not Syncedbe a good way to go. Thank you.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Thank you, Sébastien. Anyone else?
-
Not Synced>> PAUL WILSON: Final remarks. Well, I think the suggestion with
-
Not Syncedreference to the national and regional IGFs is really well put. And I
-
Not Syncedthink this kind of -- ongoing process that's employed by Dynamic
-
Not SyncedCoalition is a really good one for linkage at the regional and
-
Not Syncednational levels. And, come to talk of that, there was recently an
-
Not SyncedAustralian IGF, which had a really nice session - a little too
-
Not Syncedambitious as it happened for the time available, but it was a really
-
Not Syncednice approach to Internet values, which started with a brainstorming
-
Not Syncedon what are the aspects of the Internet that we believe are
-
Not Syncedfundamental, and which we either take for granted, as I mentioned
-
Not Syncedbefore, or which we would regret if we lost.
-
Not SyncedAnd I think that's a really interesting approach, but one of the --
-
Not Syncedone of the sort of problems I guess I had with the process was that it
-
Not Syncedwas a little bit over expansive for me. So it tended to capture
-
Not Syncedeverything that we wanted out of the Internet, whether freedom of
-
Not Syncedspeech was on the list, I'm not sure, but it was sort of -- it could
-
Not Syncedhave been, the way, with that brainstorming approach. And I think the
-
Not Syncedpowerful term there is a word I learned to spell during WSIS which is
-
Not Syncedsubsidiarity, and it's this idea, that the solution to any given
-
Not Syncedproblem is best located closest to that problem. It doesn't mean
-
Not Syncedgeographical actually. I'm just recalling that Roham Samarajiva made
-
Not Syncedthis staement that international treaties should be limited to what
-
Not Syncedthey, and they alone, need to do. Which is also a statement of
-
Not Syncedsubsidiarity. SO if we are talking about Internet principles I would
-
Not Syncedlike to suggest to bear that in mind and be really looking at what
-
Not Syncedfundamental to the Internet, not to do with our expectations and our
-
Not Syncedhigher aspirations, out of the Internet. Because we kind of know
-
Not Syncedthat's unlimited, really, but to look at it from that point of view,
-
Not Syncedand maybe that's something that an exercise, in the meantime, or
-
Not Syncedthrough linkage to regional, national, IGFs we could look at. Thanks.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Some very interesting comments, as well Alejandro,
-
Not Syncedor Nick, any closing comments before people need to run?
-
Not Synced>> ALEJANDRO PISANTY: Very briefly, I think the point of subsidiarity
-
Not Syncedis very well put by Paul. We must make form follow function. In many
-
Not Syncedcountries raising a national IGF brings a number of metaphors. It's
-
Not Syncedlike kicking a sleeping dog while you are raising a high antenna under
-
Not Synceda thunderstorm and painting yourself a target, and a few more of
-
Not Syncedthose, but it's really not necessarily a desirable thing. You have to
-
Not Syncedfind the tactic that's locally appropriate.
-
Not SyncedI do take very seriously, the excitement and the enthusiasm, the wiki
-
Not Syncedactually already exists. We have to -- I take responsibility, I
-
Not Syncedguess, together with Siva, to activate it and make it known, and make
-
Not Syncedit available for you to contribute, and we have a mailing list that we
-
Not Syncedwill include you in and make more active. All the things exist and I'm
-
Not Syncedcommitting to you to put a lot of the effort into making it continue,
-
Not Syncedand be of service, and be actually fed by everybody.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: Nick? And just one quick comment, you can actually
-
Not Syncedget to the Dynamic Coalition from the IGF home page on the left-hand,
-
Not Syncedand we will make sure that you can get easy access to the list and
-
Not Syncedthat sort of information from there as well.
-
Not Synced>> NICK ASHTON-HART That was going to be my question is do we want
-
Not Syncedit, like, people to give an address or something, who want to get on
-
Not Syncedthe mailing list, or is it easier to just go to the IGF website or
-
Not Syncedsomething?
-
Not Synced>> SIVASUBRAMANIAN MUTHUSAMY: What you could do is you can all give me
-
Not Syncedyour cards and straightaway, by today evening, I will send you a mail
-
Not Syncedgiving you a link tothe mailing address, or sending you an invitation
-
Not Syncedto the mailing list straight away.
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: I'm having a small cognitive dissonance right now. And
-
Not Syncedthe reasaon is that, we were talking about trying to move away from
-
Not Syncednation state, sovereignty and everything else. So why do we think
-
Not Syncedthat we have to have national and regional IGFs? Why aren't we
-
Not Syncedtalking about people who are -- have common interests, no matter where
-
Not Syncedthey happen to be and the organizing principle is not where you are,
-
Not Syncedbut what you think and what you are interested in.
-
Not Synced>> PAUL WILSON: It has to do with travel costs. (Laughter)
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: No, that's why we use the Internet to do this in the
-
Not Syncedfirst place.
-
Not Synced>> PAUL WILSON: But Google hangout only allows ten people at once.
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: Well, so, that's what a design team's all about.
-
Not SyncedThere's also On-The-Air version which allows a bazillion people to
-
Not Syncedlisten in while the other ten are talking to each other.
-
Not Synced>> PAUL WILSON: I knew you'd have an answer.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: So I actually think we need both obviously. There
-
Not Syncedare some discussions that are really well advanced local level, local
-
Not Syncedlanguage, really particular, and you can take it to the concrete, and
-
Not Syncedthen you can actually use that to move forward and drive action. And
-
Not Syncedyet there's an awful lot of learning that happens in broader forums
-
Not Syncedand exchange of best practices and thoughts and your ideas are
-
Not Syncedenriched. I think there's a lot of value in both of them. And I
-
Not Syncedthink that's actually one of the good things about the global IGF, if
-
Not Syncedthat's what we are calling it and a whole host of different types of
-
Not Syncedforum, whether it's a national IGF or it's some workshop, you know,
-
Not Syncedit's about discussion, communication and exchange of ideas. We are a
-
Not Syncedlittle over time. I would like to thank the remote participants for
-
Not Syncedhanging in there. I'm sure this isn't nearly as robust or enriching
-
Not Syncedan activity as when you are in the room. And I see one comment back
-
Not Syncedhere from --
-
Not Synced>> REMOTE MODERATOR: Just one comment to the recent comment of Mr.
-
Not SyncedCerf, from a remote participant. Seth Johnson says, the general
-
Not Syncedpurpose nature of copyright comes from the inherent flexibility of
-
Not Syncedinformation, once it's published. This is reflected in the fact or
-
Not Syncedidea versus expression dichotomy. You don't really deal with the
-
Not Syncednature of copyright online, if you just talk about work as bags of
-
Not Syncedbits. So I think this is a question. Why is sovereignty strictly
-
Not Syncedlimited to rights? People assert their rights via local
-
Not Syncedsovereignties. It's a matter of recognizing that the people must rely
-
Not Syncedon that for rights, versus the broader oversight the nation states
-
Not Syncedattempt. So it was a comment, general.
-
Not Synced>> VINT CERF: If you want me to respond, one thing I need to respond,
-
Not Syncedthe bag of bits is not static, necessarily. Because if it's a piece
-
Not Syncedof software, or if the bits need to be interpreted by a piece of
-
Not Syncedsoftware, it's a very dynamic thing. So if the criticism is that the
-
Not Syncedbag of bits is similar to a book or other static object, I don't think
-
Not Syncedthey have to be. They cab extremely dynamic kinds of elements.
-
Not Synced>> LYNN ST. AMOUR: I wasn't forcing to you respond but I always like
-
Not Syncedyour responses. So I'd also like to thank everyone here in the room,
-
Not Syncedparticularly for being so engaged and I think some excellent questions
-
Not Syncedand suggestions. Obviously thank you to the panelists, and a very big
-
Not Syncedthank you to Siva as well. As I said, he really has been, as
-
Not SyncedAlejandro has said, the person who has kept actually kind of this
-
Not Syncedalive from forum to forum. So I would like to give everybody a round
-
Not Syncedof applause and thank you very much. (Applause)
- Title:
- Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Workshop at IGF 2012
- Description:
-
Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Workshop at the Internet Governance Forum, Baku, Azerbaijan on November 8 2012.
The third meeting of this Dynamic Coalition examined the challenges to the Open and Global Internet, define present issues and arrived at recommendations for fair policies for the further evolution of the Internet as a free and open eco-system
Chair:Lynn St Amour, President of the Internet Society,
Participants include:
* Nick Ashton-Hart - Geneva Representative, Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA)
* Sebastien Bachollet, ICANN Board
* Fatima Cambronero - President, AGEIA DENSI (Argentina)
* Vint Cerf, Chief Internet Evangelist, Google
* Sivasubramanian Muthusamy, President, Internet Society India Chennai
* Alejandro Pisanty, Chair, Internet Society Mexico,
* Paul Wilson (Director General, APNIC)http://wsms1.intgovforum.org/2012/Meetings/dynamic-coalition-core-internet-values
- Video Language:
- English
- Team:
- Captions Requested
- Duration:
- 01:27:50
ISOC-NY edited English subtitles for Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Workshop at IGF 2012 | ||
ISOC-NY edited English subtitles for Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Workshop at IGF 2012 | ||
ISOC-NY edited English subtitles for Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Workshop at IGF 2012 | ||
ISOC-NY edited English subtitles for Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Workshop at IGF 2012 | ||
ISOC-NY added a translation |