<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hi William</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Besides the unilateral designation (by the ITU),
lack of travel (and staying) support is the best filter to prevent CS "activits"
from expressing their views and opinons. They may disturb the "one-way thinking"
of the organisers ! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>What nice auspices for the transition to Tunis
are they preparing for us !</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Best regards</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jean-Louis Fullsack </FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=wdrake@ictsd.ch href="mailto:wdrake@ictsd.ch">William Drake</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=plenary@wsis-cs.org
href="mailto:plenary@wsis-cs.org">plenary@wsis-cs.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=bjaffre@csdptt.org
href="mailto:bjaffre@csdptt.org">bjaffre@csdptt.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, January 24, 2004 2:10
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re:
[governance] Internet governance :roles of plenary and governance lists</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<P><FONT size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Hi
Jean-Louis,</FONT></FONT></P>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Perhaps it would be
helpful by way of background to pass along a message sent yesterday to the
governance list. </DIV>
<P>Bottom line, it's an ITU meeting, not a WSIS meeting, subject to ITU
procedures. I've inquired about whether some invites can be allocated
for CS 'stakeholder representation,' which is not the model they're following
in relation to non-members. We'll see what happens. Of course, it
would be good to know when asking for this if in fact there are people who
would actually be prepared to attend, given that there's no budget for travel
support....?</P>
<P>Best,</P>
<P>Bill<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: William Drake [</FONT><A
href="mailto:wdrake@ictsd.ch"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>mailto:wdrake@ictsd.ch</FONT></A><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>]<BR>Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 2:04 PM<BR>To:
governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>Subject: CS Participation in ITU's Internet
Governance Workshop<BR><BR>Hi,<BR><BR>Had a call this morning from Bob Shaw at
ITU about their upcoming event </FONT><A target=_blank
href="http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/forum/intgov04/index.html"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"
size=3>http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/forum/intgov04/index.html</FONT></A><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>. We had a useful and lengthy conversation
from which several points of local interest emerged.<BR><BR>1.
Focus. There has been debate on this list about the scope of
governments' intentions and thinking with respect to 'Internet governance'
and, in consequence, what we should be focusing on as a group. It sounds
like the ITU's reading of its members' interests is consistent with what I had
thought was the rather unambiguous language of the summit declaration, and
indeed the whole preparatory process. They are not equating 'Internet
governance' with just the activities of ICANN, and the workshop is not about
just ICANN and whether ITU should be taking over its management of identifiers
etc (although of course these issues are inevitably a key part of the
mix). Taking into account the landscape of international arrangements
that impact Internet infrastructure, services, communication and commerce, the
goal is to define Internet governance broadly and identify those aspects
thereof that could require national and global public policies
(implicitly, the latter might be areas ITU could have a lead role in).
So it's fairly open ended, and could entail anything from
interconnection/ICAIS to taxation to whatever. Indeed, Bob noted that
ITU is organizing a workshop in the spring on spam that is understood to build
directly on this event.<BR><BR>2. Relation to WSIS/Invitation
Process. While the WSIS process gives rise to the meeting, this is an
ITU event, to "initiate a process to prepare ITU's inputs and position"
vis-a-vis the UN working group. As such, it is the rules and
organizational culture of ITU that apply here, not those of WSIS. This
goes directly to how they have been approaching the matter of invitations to
participate. They have been following a top down model in which the
secretariat reaches out to selected individual experts to round out a meeting
that will be overwhelmingly populated by the governments and businesses that
are the ITU's paying members and sector members, respectively. They were
not thinking of civil society organizations as an fixed constituency that
should be 'represented' per se and thus should have a right to nominate
representatives on a bottom up basis. Moreover, the secretariat people
involved are generally speaking not quite up to speed on the whole WSIS CS
process and apparatus. Bob for example had no idea how we are
organized---bureau, plenary, CT, families/caucuses/WGs etc---and have made
decisions, and hence didn't know how to respond when various individuals
started writing to say they represented xyz CS grouping and hence would like
to attend, expenses paid please. I should add that, contrary to
something I conjectured about previously, he says the line-up of participants
will definitely include plenty of critics of the ITU.<BR><BR>3.
Participation of the Caucus. In fact, the caucus will be almost
disproportionately well represented, with (if I recall correctly) at a minimum
Vittorio, Izumi, Milton, Bertrand, Wolfgang, and myself in attendance.
But we are invited as individual experts, not as caucus representatives (he
didn't know much about the caucus). Per the invite letter, we are asked
as individuals to consider writing something. I asked whether it would
be ok if, should the caucus get it together to write a joint statement, this
could be presented by someone as part of the program. He said sure, why
not, we can have a slot for this somewhere in sessions 1-4. So as I
think others have suggested, we should move on both tracks, individual and
collective inputs, to ensure non-government/business thinking is well
represented.<BR><BR>The above begs two questions:<BR><BR>a. While the
process discussions have at times been made unnecessarily unpleasant, we
clearly need to make final decision on the caucus name, coordinators, and
website. We obviously cannot issue a joint statement etc. without doing
these things.<BR><BR>b. We need to figure out how we are going to
coordinate with the larger WSIS CS structure. We can adopt a joint
statement as a caucus, but should we also be seeking a broader endorsement
thereof? Or should we even be thinking of something that would not be a
caucus statement, but rather a statement that would be done with and endorsed
by the much broader range of organizations that have devoted time and energy
to WSIS? As I said in a message on Dec. 19, I personally think we should
not assume that by default this group 'owns' any issue that arises related to
'Internet governance,' and that we should actively engage
others.<BR><BR>4. Participation of WSIS CSOs More Generally.
Finally, while ITU was not thinking of constituency representation, I urged
Bob to start. In particular, I asked that he consult with his colleagues
and see if it wouldn't be possible to reserve a block of invitations, like
maybe ten, for people who could be nominated from the larger assemblage of CS
groups in WSIS, even though this isn't a WSIS event. He said that would
be tough because they have a limited number of bodies they can accommodate and
the governments and businesses involved in ITU will want to provide most of
them; indeed, rather interestingly, he noted that he'd heard from some
businesses that they wanted slots because they'd heard the CSO people were
getting slots! Anyway, we'll see if anything can be done. He noted
that no matter what's decided on this score, there's no money to fly people in
etc.<BR><BR>So that's that.<BR><BR>Best,<BR><BR>Bill</FONT><BR><BR><BR>>
-----Original Message-----<BR>> From: plenary-admin@wsis-cs.org<BR>> [<A
href="mailto:plenary-admin@wsis-cs.org">mailto:plenary-admin@wsis-cs.org</A>]On
Behalf Of Fullsack Jean-Louis<BR>> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 10:51
PM<BR>> To: plenary@wsis-cs.org<BR>> Cc: bjaffre@csdptt.org<BR>>
Subject: Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] Internet<BR>>
governance :roles of plenary and governance lists<BR>><BR>><BR>>
Sorry, Wolfgang, Adam and others<BR>> Once more the ITU Secretary general
has selected his<BR>> interlocutors. This is<BR>> unacceptable for the
Civil Society.<BR>> If the CS is to participate as a speeking partner in
these "panel<BR>> discussions" we -the CS Plenary- ought to be informed
previously about the<BR>> content and rationale of the CS contributions
and/or position. And we -the<BR>> CS Plenary- are to designate our
representative(s) accordingly.<BR>> No closed doors negociations on behalf
of the CS and please no<BR>> "welcome" for<BR>> Utsumi's nominal
"invitations".<BR>> Jean-Louis Fullsack<BR>>
CSDPTT<BR>><BR>><BR>> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> From:
"AIZU" <aizu@anr.org><BR>> To: <plenary@wsis-cs.org>;
"Governance" <governance@lists.cpsr.org><BR>> Sent: Wednesday,
January 21, 2004 1:02 PM<BR>> Subject: Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re:
[governance] Internet governance<BR>> :roles of plenary and governance
lists<BR>><BR>><BR>> > I also received an invitation from ITU a
few hours ago, and<BR>> > am trying to modify my schedule to go.<BR>>
><BR>> > I fully agree with Vittorio that we should coordinate our
participation.<BR>> ><BR>> > izumi<BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> > At 11:04 04/01/21 +0100, Vittorio Bertola wrote:<BR>>
> >wolfgang@imv.au.dk ha scritto:<BR>> > >>
Thanks Adam & Jeanette,<BR>> > >> this is good step
forward.<BR>> > >> What do you think about a Caucus
Website?<BR>> > ><BR>> > >Actually, I was tasked
with preparing it in Geneva, and I have started<BR>> > working. I
stopped when the discussion on our name & domain name went<BR>> >
nowhere, but if we can accept to live with the name Adam<BR>> registered on
his<BR>> > own (gov-net.org), I think I can come up with an initial
site<BR>> by the next<BR>> > weekend. At least, I hope so.<BR>>
> ><BR>> > >> I think the letter to Kofi
Annanエs office is as urgent as a<BR>> letter to<BR>> > Utsumi.
It should be short letters. Could you write a first draft?<BR>> >
><BR>> > >Support. I think our new coordinators should
manage the agenda and get<BR>> > deliverables done :)<BR>> >
><BR>> > >> Concerning the letter to Utsumi, we should
take note in this letter<BR>> > (and welcome), that some Caucus members
has been invited by him in their<BR>> > personal capacity as experts and
than propose three other<BR>> names. As far as<BR>> > I know Milton
and Betrand has been invited officially.<BR>> > ><BR>>
> >I got an "early notice of an invitation" yesterday
evening.<BR>> (So I don't<BR>> > need a "ticket" from the caucus, I
think.)<BR>> > ><BR>> > >An interesting note is
that the invitation says that invited<BR>> experts are<BR>> >
supposed to express their preference on whether they would like "to<BR>>
> >either introduce their contributions, make presentations
and/or<BR>> > >participate in panel discussions". I think we
should coordinate<BR>> ourselves<BR>> > so that CS people don't end
up all in the panels or all making<BR>> > presentations... The agenda is
not clear yet, but, if we can, I think we<BR>> > should try to get a CS
person in every relevant panel (assuming that the<BR>> > organizers will
agree, of course...)<BR>> > >--<BR>> >
>.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo vb.<BR>> > >Vittorio Bertola - vb [a]
bertola.eu.org<BR>> > ><A target=_blank
href="http://bertola.eu.org/">http://bertola.eu.org/</A>
<-- Vecchio sito, nuovo toblog!<BR>> > ><BR>> >
>_______________________________________________<BR>> >
>Plenary mailing list<BR>> > >Plenary@wsis-cs.org<BR>>
> ><A target=_blank
href="http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary">http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary</A><BR>>
> ><BR>> ><BR>> >
_______________________________________________<BR>> > Plenary mailing
list<BR>> > Plenary@wsis-cs.org<BR>> > <A target=_blank
href="http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary">http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary</A><BR>><BR>>
</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>