[discuss] [governance] NTIA statement

Nick Ashton-Hart nashton at ccianet.org
Mon Mar 17 10:05:43 UTC 2014


On 17 Mar 2014, at 10:57, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Nick,
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at ccianet.org> wrote:
> Dear Seun, inline responses
>> As per the NetMundial, i agree with Avri that from recent happenings, ICANN-IANA related issues may carry the majority of the agenda which ofcourse was not the only reason why the event was conjured in the first place. However since the ICANN-IANA discussion will start from ICANN49 i think some foundational progress will have been made to further lighten up the NetMundial agenda to accommodate the other half of the goal which is largely related to mass surveillance.
> I think if NetMundial is consumed with ICANN issues that will be both a mistake and a huge missed opportunities. Finding a way to agree on principles, and what is, and is not, appropriate for IG policy to address would be a significant added value; there is also no other global forum designed to produce outcomes along these lines. The discussion of internationalizing ICANN has a home for discussions: ICANN.
> Okay maybe i should clarify there. When i say ICANN-IANA issue, i am not referring to internationalizing ICANN but Globalization of IANA as per the recent NTIA release. There is no doubt ICANN has been given the task to work with other I* to come up with an appropriate proposals for the process. 1Net (which whether we like it or not =ICANN IG space) is already a Co-organiser of NetMundial, which gives the opportunity to have a brother multistakeholder environment (that goes beyond the regular multi-stakeholder settings within ICANN itself) to discuss the IANA globalization and charter a possible direction. It will actually not be doing "due diligence" if such remained within the ICANN meetings/processes itself. So i think 1Net will be taking advantage of upcoming NetMundial to reach a brother scope.

While I think this will happen, I, for one, don't see the value of multiplying the same discussion in different fora with the same core people in all of them.  There are people here for whom the ICANN/IANA evolution is not a core issue (myself being one of them).  The two objectives of NetMundial are neither specific to ICANN or IANA, but far broader; we need that broader discussion.

> I don't think anyone here is disagreeing with recent development on ICANN-IANA, as it is good news. However we should also not let that overwhelm the other present concerns. Lets remember that the ICANN-IANA processes is to prevent the future "what-IFs" while mass surveillance on the other hand is currently happening and we should not neglect that.
> "we" cannot solve national security issues. All we can do is insist that the various aspects of national security use of data and the rules by which non-nationals are treated are dealt with - in the fora where they are already under discussion.
> This is the point; for me, it goes beyond national security, as i think that is just one side of it. There is personal security, organisation security and even the global security at stake. If there are indeed fora where issues like these are discussed and the voices from such forums are indeed recognised then why not, we go for it through such forums, until then we stick to the forum we know. (by the way the access.org seem un-reachable). 

There really isn't an 'until then' I don't think. The HRC has been dealing with surveillance as a main element of work, as regards the HR aspects, extremely capably, for quite a while now. The next major milestone is this June's HRC meeting. For those of you interested in HR and the online world, I strongly suggest you engage there if you aren't already; that's the venue where you can be successful as that's where the expertise and political engagement is. For the social aspects of surveillance, a process is just beginning at UNESCO; again, if that's your cup of tea, you go there. For security, there's the London Process and the annual conferences where that process goes forward. Etc. etc. For data protection issues that are not state-related, there are national and international fora where these are discussed too.

https://mlat.info/app.php/ works great here.

> The thing is we take surveillance as starting point and when we have raised so much awareness, we divert to other topics and then conclude that surveillance place is no longer here. Again i am in no way saying other topics are not also important but one is not necessarily more than the other.

I am not sure that I follow what you mean in this paragraph.

> Cheers!
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Seun Ojedeji,
> Federal University Oye-Ekiti
> web:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
> Mobile: +2348035233535
> alt email: seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140317/1f9279c7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140317/1f9279c7/signature.asc>

More information about the discuss mailing list