[Values-ethics] FW: [governance] Comments and Draft of HR caucus proposal to IGF

Sat Apr 1 05:43:18 BST 2006

Max, it would be good if you could take the lead for Values and Ethics to
help gather views and inputs if any, if not to use your judgement and keep
us posted. I hope Liberato and Bahiyiih, the original coordinators of this
group will also come forth and be active again.

Best,
Laina

  _____  

From: values-ethics-admin at wsis-cs.org
[mailto:values-ethics-admin at wsis-cs.org] On Behalf Of Laina Raveendran
Greene
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 7:18 PM
To: values-ethics at wsis-cs.org
Subject: RE: [Values-ethics] FW: [governance] Comments and Draft of HR
caucus proposal to IGF

I tend to agree with you Max that maybe a separate statement may be too late
to coordinate and that it is probably better to consider this issue
cross-cutting. 

I wonder what you think about the statement from the HR caucus below on the
"ethical" components not being relevant. Perhaps we could just respond along
those lines.

Best,
Laina

  _____  

From: values-ethics-admin at wsis-cs.org
[mailto:values-ethics-admin at wsis-cs.org] On Behalf Of Max Senges
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:05 AM
To: values-ethics at wsis-cs.org
Subject: Re: [Values-ethics] FW: [governance] Comments and Draft of HR
caucus proposal to IGF

Hi Laina and all,

I do not think we can (should) produce a statement in some hours... I do
think that we could and should think about what this caucus wants to
contribute to the IGF?

>From what I have learned about our constituency and history I understand
that we add a ethical (meta-physical/spiritual) perspective driven by a
shared idealism.

As such, and as said before, our approach is cross-cutting and paramount to
'practical Internet governance'. Therefore i wonder whether there is
interest to prepare one or a collection of statements outlining different
perspectives on the ethical dimension and the role of values in cyberspace.
I think a collection of texts from the different spiritual and cultural
groups would be a very interesting compendium and would serve two purposes
1) the theme of the ethical/religious/meta-physical role of cyberspace would
be discussed inside and amongst the participants of the communities that
have participants in this caucus and 2) the result would represent a first
overview of the different perspectives and hence represent a good basis for
finding common ground and program. What do you think?

I would be motivated to contribute and help coordinate

my 2 cents
max  

Laina Raveendran Greene wrote: 

Dear Max, Liberato and team,

Should the values and ethics caucus also work on a paper submission?

Laina

-----Original Message-----

From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org

[mailto:governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Meryem Marzouki

Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 1:05 AM

To: governance at lists.cpsr.org

Subject: [governance] Comments and Draft of HR caucus proposal to IGF

Hi all,

Please find attached a draft proposal, still submitted for comments to the

HR caucus. Some changes will probably occur before sending late today the

proposal to IGF. Your comments are also welcome (Stephane Bortzmeyer will

recognize his idea - and some of his words, with permission:) - of sticking

to the basics: IGF should only discuss issues needing mandatory governance).

I'm sorry to jump in the discussion so late - due to work overload -, but I

would really like to draw your attention to the fact that one of the

proposals circulated on this list ("internet content filtering and free

expression", posted by Milton), may be _very_ dangerous and

counterproductive, though well intentioned.

I do share the idea that there is a need to develop 'ethical'  

guidelines for Internet companies, when there is no possibility to use

legislation/public policy. In fact, I've even myself made this kind of

recommendation at a workshop on racism and the internet organized by the

OHCHR, as a followup to the Durban conference (see

http://www-polytic.lip6.fr/article.php3?id_article=127 if interested). I

entirely agree that this should be extended to companie that sells filtering

software to non democratic governments (cf. the study conducted by the

OpenNet Initiative, http:// www.opennetinitiative.net/), in the framework of

a new set of "Corporate social responsibility" rules (till now, CSR is

rather applied to compliance with labor rights) that should be pushed with

some friendly (on this issue) governments as a start.

However, proposing this in the IGF framework will certainly open the way to

a definition of "ethical content", "acceptable by all in the whole world"

allowed on the Internet. Many people genuinely think that this would be a

good idea, because of the problem of competence of jurisdiction, etc.

Remember the Mahomet cartoons ? Ever thought of "harmful content for minors"

? Such proposal immediately lead to a list of "inappropriate content" that

may be filtered for ethical reasons. And, believe it or not, such lists are

not pushed only by governments.

I think we should keep in mind that, while IGF mandate is rather centred on

discussing and framing issues, with no actual decisive power, this forum

will be considered as a place of negociation for governements, whether we

like it or not. We should then be cautious when formulating our proposals.

This is the reason why the HR caucus proposal doesn't include FoE as a theme

by itself. It rather proposes to establish a task force on FoE, privacy and

the rule of law (pls read it in the attached proposal).

Best,

Meryem

  _____  

_______________________________________________

governance mailing list

governance at lists.cpsr.org

https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance

_______________________________________________ Values-ethics mailing list
Values-ethics at wsis-cs.org
http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/values-ethics 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/values-ethics/attachments/20060331/eb5b9c0a/attachment.html