<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi all,<br>
<br>
Yesterday the US Department of State held a public briefing on WSIS.
My notes are below.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Frannie<br>
<br>
***<br>
Frannie Wellings<br>
Free Press<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://freepress.net">http://freepress.net</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
US International Telecommunication Advisory Committee Information
Meeting on the WSIS<br>
National Academy of Science Building<br>
Washington, DC<br>
April 19, 2005<br>
<br>
<br>
Ambassador David Gross:<br>
<br>
Digital Solidarity Fund<br>
Ambassador Gross said that the Digital Solidarity Fund exists and they
must now deal with it - he stated that he'd worked to get the word
"voluntary" inserted into multiple places in the text. He continued to
overemphasize their
preference for a fund of a voluntary nature. He stated, "As a proud
member of the Bush Administration, my position is predictable - there
should be no international taxation. All funding should be voluntary."<br>
<br>
WGIG<br>
Gross encouraged industry, NGO's and academia to provide input to the
WGIG. He said the State Department is not interested in negotiating
multiple times in multiple venues and would not be responding much
more. He's concerned that the positions of the US community (which I
took to mean industry) would not be articulated if everyone assumed
others were submitting positions. He explained that the report would
be issued on July 18th and that there would be a 1 month comment
period. The State Dept is going to issue a notice soliciting comments
to be filed through the WGIG when the comment period opens. Open
issues from the WGIG report will be dealt with at prepcom III.<br>
<br>
Gross is concerned by the Council of the European Union's submission to
the WGIG consultation. He said the EU statement calls for a new model
of governance for the core resources of the Internet, building on
existing organizations, founded on a multilateral basis taking into
account the public policy interests of governments. The State
Department is concerned that the European Union position substantially
differs from the US, which prefers that the private sector leads.
(Below, I've copied the European Union statement from the April 18th
transcript for reference.)<br>
<br>
Political Chapeau<br>
The State Dept is concerned by the efforts to create and shape the
Political Chapeau. They felt that the Declaration of Principles and
the Plan of Action were good and they say their concern is over the
possibility of inconsistencies between the Political Chapeau and the
older documents. Ambassador Gross said he's been traveling a lot
recently having bilateral discussions regarding the Chapeau to explain
his point of view (which I took to mean lobby).<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------<br>
<br>
Sally Shipman:<br>
<br>
Basic Overview of Documents<br>
Prepcom I - Idea for Political Chapeau and Operational Part<br>
Prepcom II - Draft Political Chapeau: compilation of proposals by
governments in Prepcom II. The debate will take place in Prepcom III.
The Operational Part has four chapters: 1) Implementation [US on page
15], 2) Financing [mostly stable text], 3) Internet Governance [blank
until after WGIG report/comment/debate], 4) The path ahead [will debate
at Prepcom III].<br>
<br>
Organization of Prepcom III<br>
There will be two subcommittees: 1) Internet Governance and 2)
Everything else<br>
<br>
WGIG Report<br>
She encouraged everyone to submit comments on the WGIG report -
deadline is August 15th.<br>
<br>
--------------<br>
<br>
Questions<br>
<br>
Patrice Lyons, Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI)<br>
Q: Patrice is concerned with the approach she sees in the latest WGIG
documents that assume a fixation in the Internet, particularly what she
sees as too much emphasis on the end-to-end principle. She thinks this
could prevent the Internet from evolving. <br>
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross agrees.<br>
<br>
Mike Nelson, IBM and Internet Society<br>
Q: He thinks the report on financing is a good product, but was
shelved, and he thinks the early papers of the WGIG were good, but were
also shelved and ignored in the development of the cluster papers. He
thinks the cluster papers are not very good and finds them
frustrating. <br>
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross encourages him to submit his statement so
it is recorded.<br>
<br>
Q: Mike asks what they know about the number of Heads of State going to
Tunis. He says many will be in NY in September for the Millennium
Summit and he thinks the action might take place there. <br>
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross says that the Tunisians are saying many
more Heads of State will participate, though he doesn't know if this is
true. Gross adds that Heads of State are unlikely to discuss tech
issues in a fluid discussion at the Millennium Summit.<br>
<br>
Audience member question<br>
Q: In terms of Internet Governance, what is the best and worse case
scenario in your opinion? Ambassador Gross answers that this ought to
be a positive experience. It's a job for all of us to focus it on
stability, flexibility, robustness. He's struck by the comments of the
EU, that to him it suggests a preference for an outcome with more
governmental control than the US had articulated. <br>
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross says that the State Department doesn't want
to maintain the status quo, but wants to build on the successes. The
best case scenario, he says, is that everyone agrees with the State
Department.<br>
<br>
Paula (Internet Society?)<br>
Q: What will happen to the UN ICT Task Force and the Global Alliance
proposal? <br>
A: Ambassador Gross - Gross describes the proposal put forward by the
Secretary of the UN ICT Task Force for the Global Alliance and the
history of the TF. He said there's been a robust discussion about the
Global Alliance proposal as a follow up organization. Some have said
there's no need and others would like the UN ICT Task Force to continue
under this different name. There are questions about how it would fit
and relate to existing organizations and what would be the value
added? The US has said that the task force ought not to be the vehicle
post-wsis, that traditional mechanisms/existing organizations are
better suited.<br>
<br>
<br>
---------------------<br>
<br>
European Union Statement at the <br>
OPEN CONSULTATIONS OF THE THIRD MEETING OF THE WORKING GROUP ON
INTERNET GOVERNANCE<br>
18 APRIL 2005 [morning session]<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.wgig.org/April-scriptmorning.html">http://www.wgig.org/April-scriptmorning.html</a><br>
<br>
Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken
during the morning session of the WGIG open Consultations held 18 April
in Geneva, Switzerland. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases
it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or
transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the
proceedings at the session, but should not be treated as an
authoritative record. <br>
<br>
>>Chairman Desai: Luxembourg.<br>
>>Luxembourg: thank you, chair. I speak on behalf of the
presidency on the council of the European Union.<br>
The E.U. would like to thank the WGIG for its ongoing work on key
issues related to the stable and secure functioning of the internet.<br>
Among these, the question of internationalization of the management of
the internet's core resources; namely the domain names systems, ip
addresses, and the root server system, appears as one of the main
issues in this debate.<br>
The E.U. believes that a new cooperation is needed in order to confer
the WSIS principles regarding the crucial role of all actors within
internet governance. Including governance, the private sector, civil
society, and international organizations.<br>
We think that the existing internet governance mechanisms should be
founded on a more solid, democratic, transparent, and multilateral
basis, with a stronger emphasis on the public policy interests of all
governments.<br>
This new model should be based on the following principles.<br>
It should not replace existing mechanism or institutions, but should
build on the existing structures of internet governance, with a special
emphasis on the complementarity between all the actors in this process.
Governments, and, recognizing the importance of national
responsibilities and roles. Second the new public/private cooperation
model, should contribute to the sustainable stability and robustness of
the internet by addressing appropriately public policy issues related
to key elements of internet governance.<br>
The E.U. believes that governments do have a specific mission and
responsibility vis-a-vis their citizens and their role within this new
corporation model should be mainly focused on issues of public policy
excluding any involvement in the day-to-day operations.<br>
Furthermore, the E.U. strongly reaffirms its attachment to the
architectural principles of the internet including interoperability,
openness and the end-to-end principle.<br>
We therefore support the WGIG in its paper on the root zone file and
the root zone management when it states proposals for improvements need
to consider in general the existing system has functioned properly from
the technical point of view for more than two decades and that
adjustments were needed first for technical and political reasons have
to be made in a proper and adequate way related to the functioning,
stability, security and further development of the internet. End of
quote.<br>
This is why we encourage the WGIG to present balanced options for a
true internationalization of the management of the internet's core
resources in its final report.<br>
While this statement is limited to the issue of internationalization,
the E.U. reiterates the importance it attaches to the stability,
dependability and robustness of the internet, including spam and
network security.<br>
Thank you, Chairman.<br>
<br>
<br>
<h1 align="left"><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"><br>
<small><font face="Arial"><small><br>
</small></font></small></font></h1>
<br>
</body>
</html>