Hi to all Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner. Look forward to hearing others reactions. Fiona ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fiona Alexander Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute American University
Thanks Fiona, On a quick read, and my stance may change, I see one possible fishhook in the Internet Governance area as per: 27. We recognize that the governance of the Internet must remain global in nature, with the full involvement of all states and other stakeholders in accordance with the Tunis Agenda. We reaffirm multilateral and multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance and the central role of the Internet Governance Forum for multistakeholder discussion on public policy issues related to the Internet, as well as the NETmundial principles. Not entirely clear what "multilateral... approaches to Internet governance" refers to. If it's in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it's an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I'd be concerned.. J. From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Fiona Alexander Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2024 10:12 PM To: wsis20@ICANN.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] - [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Hi to all Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner. Look forward to hearing others reactions. Fiona ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fiona Alexander Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute American University
I made almost an identical note Jordan... that needs IMO clarification <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_me...> Cheryl Langdon-Orr about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr <https://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_me...> On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 at 22:30, Jordan Carter via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks Fiona,
On a quick read, and my stance may change, I see one possible fishhook in the Internet Governance area as per:
*27. We recognize that the governance of the Internet must remain global in nature, with the full involvement of all states and other stakeholders in accordance with the Tunis Agenda. We reaffirm multilateral and multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance and the central role of the Internet Governance Forum for multistakeholder discussion on public policy issues related to the Internet, as well as the NETmundial principles* *.*
Not entirely clear what “multilateral… approaches to Internet governance” refers to. If it’s in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it’s an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I’d be concerned..
J.
*From:* wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Fiona Alexander *Sent:* Thursday, June 27, 2024 10:12 PM *To:* wsis20@ICANN.org *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] - [wsis20] GDC Rev 2
Hi to all
Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner.
Look forward to hearing others reactions.
Fiona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiona Alexander
Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service
Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab
Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute
American University _______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thanks, Jordan. Yes, that’s a valid point. We plan to discuss it on Monday during the webinars ( noon and midnight UTC to cover all participants from around the globe). Best, v/ From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jordan Carter via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Reply-To: Jordan Carter <jordan.carter@auda.org.au> Date: Thursday, June 27, 2024 at 08:31 To: "wsis20@ICANN.org" <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: Re: [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Thanks Fiona, On a quick read, and my stance may change, I see one possible fishhook in the Internet Governance area as per: 27. We recognize that the governance of the Internet must remain global in nature, with the full involvement of all states and other stakeholders in accordance with the Tunis Agenda. We reaffirm multilateral and multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance and the central role of the Internet Governance Forum for multistakeholder discussion on public policy issues related to the Internet, as well as the NETmundial principles. Not entirely clear what “multilateral… approaches to Internet governance” refers to. If it’s in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it’s an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I’d be concerned.. J. From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Fiona Alexander Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2024 10:12 PM To: wsis20@ICANN.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] - [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Hi to all Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner. Look forward to hearing others reactions. Fiona ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fiona Alexander Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute American University
I should have included the links for folks to register for the webinars: Zoom Registration links: Webinar 1: Monday, July 1, 2024, 12:00 UTC (Washington DC UTC-4 hours) https://icann.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJAuf-6gqj4uGtJUiIHKJwTUwwc5qRu3ga5C Webinar 2: Tuesday, July 2, 2024, 00:00 UTC (Singapore UTC+8 hours) https://icann.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJcucuypqz4rGNOPFu8JsTHEIQTajXrTOHrU best, v/ From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Veni Markovski <veni.markovski@icann.org> Date: Thursday, June 27, 2024 at 13:38 To: Jordan Carter <jordan.carter@auda.org.au>, "wsis20@ICANN.org" <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: Re: [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Thanks, Jordan. Yes, that’s a valid point. We plan to discuss it on Monday during the webinars ( noon and midnight UTC to cover all participants from around the globe). Best, v/ From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jordan Carter via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Reply-To: Jordan Carter <jordan.carter@auda.org.au> Date: Thursday, June 27, 2024 at 08:31 To: "wsis20@ICANN.org" <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: Re: [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Thanks Fiona, On a quick read, and my stance may change, I see one possible fishhook in the Internet Governance area as per: 27. We recognize that the governance of the Internet must remain global in nature, with the full involvement of all states and other stakeholders in accordance with the Tunis Agenda. We reaffirm multilateral and multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance and the central role of the Internet Governance Forum for multistakeholder discussion on public policy issues related to the Internet, as well as the NETmundial principles. Not entirely clear what “multilateral… approaches to Internet governance” refers to. If it’s in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it’s an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I’d be concerned.. J. From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Fiona Alexander Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2024 10:12 PM To: wsis20@ICANN.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] - [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Hi to all Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner. Look forward to hearing others reactions. Fiona ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fiona Alexander Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute American University
On 27/06/2024 13:30, Jordan Carter via wsis20 wrote:
/27. We recognize that the governance of the Internet must remain global in nature, with the full involvement of all states and other stakeholders in accordance with the Tunis Agenda. We reaffirm multilateral and multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance and the central role of the Internet Governance Forum for multistakeholder discussion on public policy issues related to the Internet, as well as the NETmundial principles//.///
Not entirely clear what “multilateral… approaches to Internet governance” refers to. If it’s in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it’s an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I’d be concerned..
Reading the Tunis Agenda ( https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html ) article 29 specifies: /29. We reaffirm the principles//enunciated in the Geneva phase of the WSIS, in December 2003, that the Internet has evolved into a global facility available to the public and its governance should constitute a core issue of the Information Society agenda. The international management of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations. It should ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning of the Internet, taking into account multilingualism./ So it appears that it adds nothing more than what's already in the Tunis Agenda. Multilateral is used in many parts of the Tunis Agenda. Maybe Article 27 of the GDC needs to be carefully crafted in order to avoid misinterpretation? Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond
Not entirely clear what “multilateral… approaches to Internet governance” refers to. If it’s in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it’s an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I’d be concerned..
Well GDC, obv. Which in the minds of the UN supersedes WSIS. They talk we rule style. Joly On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 3:32 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:
On 27/06/2024 13:30, Jordan Carter via wsis20 wrote:
*27. We recognize that the governance of the Internet must remain global in nature, with the full involvement of all states and other stakeholders in accordance with the Tunis Agenda. We reaffirm multilateral and multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance and the central role of the Internet Governance Forum for multistakeholder discussion on public policy issues related to the Internet, as well as the NETmundial principles* *.*
Not entirely clear what “multilateral… approaches to Internet governance” refers to. If it’s in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it’s an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I’d be concerned..
Reading the Tunis Agenda ( https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html ) article 29 specifies:
*29. We reaffirm the principles** enunciated in the Geneva phase of the WSIS, in December 2003, that the Internet has evolved into a global facility available to the public and its governance should constitute a core issue of the Information Society agenda. The international management of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations. It should ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning of the Internet, taking into account multilingualism.*
So it appears that it adds nothing more than what's already in the Tunis Agenda. Multilateral is used in many parts of the Tunis Agenda. Maybe Article 27 of the GDC needs to be carefully crafted in order to avoid misinterpretation?
Kindest regards,
Olivier Crépin-Leblond _______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Adding a more recent reference, if useful for the thread.... Microsoft Word - N1543842 (un.org)<https://publicadministration.un.org/wsis10/Portals/5/N1543842_1.pdf> Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 16 December 2015 [without reference to a Main Committee (A/70/L.33)] 70/125. Outcome document of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society 57. We take note of paragraph 29 of the Tunis Agenda, and recognize that the management of the Internet as a global facility includes multilateral, transparent, democratic and multi-stakeholder processes, with the full involvement of Governments, the private sector, civil society, international organizations, technical and academic communities and all other relevant stakeholders in accordance with their respective roles and responsibilities. From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2024 3:32 PM To: Jordan Carter <jordan.carter@auda.org.au>; wsis20@ICANN.org Subject: Re: [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 On 27/06/2024 13:30, Jordan Carter via wsis20 wrote: 27. We recognize that the governance of the Internet must remain global in nature, with the full involvement of all states and other stakeholders in accordance with the Tunis Agenda. We reaffirm multilateral and multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance and the central role of the Internet Governance Forum for multistakeholder discussion on public policy issues related to the Internet, as well as the NETmundial principles. Not entirely clear what "multilateral... approaches to Internet governance" refers to. If it's in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it's an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I'd be concerned.. Reading the Tunis Agenda ( https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html ) article 29 specifies: 29. We reaffirm the principles enunciated in the Geneva phase of the WSIS, in December 2003, that the Internet has evolved into a global facility available to the public and its governance should constitute a core issue of the Information Society agenda. The international management of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations. It should ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning of the Internet, taking into account multilingualism. So it appears that it adds nothing more than what's already in the Tunis Agenda. Multilateral is used in many parts of the Tunis Agenda. Maybe Article 27 of the GDC needs to be carefully crafted in order to avoid misinterpretation? Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond
Thanks for sharing this reference, it's very helpful. [cid:5e1acd9b-4d27-4ada-9f96-5808dad20c53] Cheryl Miller Vice President, Digital Policy United States Council for International Business (USCIB)<http://www.uscib.org/> 1400 K Street NW • Washington, DC 20005 Direct: 202.617.3155 cmiller@uscib.org<mailto:cmiller@uscib.org> [cid:74f7d34b-6b67-430d-8667-d6429c5b8866]<http://www.twitter.com/uscib>[cid:d52471d4-8fbe-4268-ba7d-b8e712f48198]<http://www.linkedin.com/company/uscib-united-states-council-for-international-business> Global Business Leadership as U.S. Affiliate of: [cid:42b06718-90d6-4fbe-9c7d-73e95f1d5b17] [cid:75cb7ba0-9df2-431b-9e70-a70c1e5e3c1d] [cid:413e2636-cf96-4b85-8fb3-873dc5ac1f96] [cid:163a5438-1f78-4861-ae7c-99c99d9dec4d] ________________________________ From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Chalmers, Susan via wsis20 <wsis20@icann.org> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 3:55 AM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Jordan Carter <jordan.carter@auda.org.au>; wsis20@ICANN.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: Re: [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Adding a more recent reference, if useful for the thread…. Microsoft Word - N1543842 (un.org)<https://publicadministration.un.org/wsis10/Portals/5/N1543842_1.pdf> Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 16 December 2015 [without reference to a Main Committee (A/70/L.33)] 70/125. Outcome document of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society 57. We take note of paragraph 29 of the Tunis Agenda, and recognize that the management of the Internet as a global facility includes multilateral, transparent, democratic and multi-stakeholder processes, with the full involvement of Governments, the private sector, civil society, international organizations, technical and academic communities and all other relevant stakeholders in accordance with their respective roles and responsibilities. From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2024 3:32 PM To: Jordan Carter <jordan.carter@auda.org.au>; wsis20@ICANN.org Subject: Re: [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 On 27/06/2024 13:30, Jordan Carter via wsis20 wrote: 27. We recognize that the governance of the Internet must remain global in nature, with the full involvement of all states and other stakeholders in accordance with the Tunis Agenda. We reaffirm multilateral and multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance and the central role of the Internet Governance Forum for multistakeholder discussion on public policy issues related to the Internet, as well as the NETmundial principles. Not entirely clear what “multilateral… approaches to Internet governance” refers to. If it’s in line with Tunis then no particular issues, but if it’s an entrée to more multilat engagement in critical internet areas I’d be concerned.. Reading the Tunis Agenda ( https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html ) article 29 specifies: 29. We reaffirm the principles enunciated in the Geneva phase of the WSIS, in December 2003, that the Internet has evolved into a global facility available to the public and its governance should constitute a core issue of the Information Society agenda. The international management of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations. It should ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning of the Internet, taking into account multilingualism. So it appears that it adds nothing more than what's already in the Tunis Agenda. Multilateral is used in many parts of the Tunis Agenda. Maybe Article 27 of the GDC needs to be carefully crafted in order to avoid misinterpretation? Kindest regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond
We welcome the 26 June revision- 2 of the GDC. We particularly applaud the new paragraph 33, which links information integrity to democratic processes and human rights, and the inclusion of independent public interest media in paragraph 34(b). We therefore call on you to incorporate the following language into the Global Digital Compact: Establish a country-level network of the Global Digital Compact to help multi-stakeholder mobilization achieve the GDC mandate, emphasizing collaboration, building capacity, knowledge sharing, and innovation as a country network. Like the UN Global Compact Country-level Network. The UN should continue the IGF and WSIS Forum accordingly! We want to endorse fully the Statement on the Global Digital Compact, June 2024, initiated by DW Academy and the Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD). ---------- Bazlu ____ AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR | Chief Executive Officer | MSS in Government & Politics, Bachelor of Laws (LL. B) Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication [In Consultative Status with the ECOSOC, Associated with the Department of Global Communications of the United Nations & Observer Organization with the UNFCCC] Policy Research Fellow, Shaping the Future of Media, Entertainment & Society in the Era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution House: 9/4 Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207| Bangladesh| Phone: +8801711881647 | +88 02 48116262 | +88 02 48119374 E-Mail: ceo@bnnrc.net<mailto:ceo@bnnrc.net> | bnnrcbd@gmail.com<mailto:bnnrcbd@gmail.com><mailto:bnnrcbd@gmail.com> | http://www.bnnrc.net<http://www.bnnrc.net/> [cid:5daa99fa-1c59-4e41-bda3-e824b1966465] ________________________________ From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Fiona Alexander <fionaa@american.edu> Sent: 27 June 2024 6:12 PM To: wsis20@ICANN.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Hi to all Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner. Look forward to hearing others reactions. Fiona ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fiona Alexander Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute American University
Hi Fiona, Thanks! I agree with the general positives of the Internet Governance portions. Perhaps I’m nitpicking, but the phrasing for Article 27 is still concerning in recognizing multilateral and multistakeholder “approaches to Internet Governance” when perhaps “processes related to Internet Governance” would’ve been better. On the other hand, it’s interesting to see the suggestion to the IGF to establish an annual policy discussion track. Best, Isra Israel Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Donate today.<https://bit.ly/3nUsQmJ> From: wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Fiona Alexander <fionaa@american.edu> Date: Thursday, 27 June 2024 at 8:12 a.m. To: wsis20@ICANN.org <wsis20@icann.org> Subject: [wsis20] GDC Rev 2 Hi to all Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner. Look forward to hearing others reactions. Fiona ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fiona Alexander Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute American University
In subsequent revisions the text may also have to aim to call for greater trust by the governments in the multistakehokder model, institutions and processes that should be able to address the challenges and tasks ahead in Internet Governance far more effectively and swiftly when supported differently with understanding. On Thu, 27 Jun, 2024, 18:04 Israel Rosas via wsis20, <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Fiona,
Thanks! I agree with the general positives of the Internet Governance portions. Perhaps I’m nitpicking, but the phrasing for Article 27 is still concerning in recognizing multilateral and multistakeholder “approaches to Internet Governance” when perhaps “processes related to Internet Governance” would’ve been better.
On the other hand, it’s interesting to see the suggestion to the IGF to establish an annual policy discussion track.
Best,
Isra
Israel Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Donate today. <https://bit.ly/3nUsQmJ>
*From: *wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Fiona Alexander < fionaa@american.edu> *Date: *Thursday, 27 June 2024 at 8:12 a.m. *To: *wsis20@ICANN.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] GDC Rev 2
Hi to all
Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner.
Look forward to hearing others reactions.
Fiona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiona Alexander
Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service
Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab
Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute
American University _______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
On Thu, 27 Jun, 2024, 18:36 Sivasubramanian Muthusamy, <Internet@nameshop.in> wrote:
In subsequent revisions the text may also have to aim to call for greater trust by the governments in the multistakehokder model, institutions and processes that should be able to address the challenges and tasks ahead in Internet Governance far more effectively and swiftly when supported differently
... supported sufficiently (typo) ... with understanding.
On Thu, 27 Jun, 2024, 18:04 Israel Rosas via wsis20, <wsis20@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Fiona,
Thanks! I agree with the general positives of the Internet Governance portions. Perhaps I’m nitpicking, but the phrasing for Article 27 is still concerning in recognizing multilateral and multistakeholder “approaches to Internet Governance” when perhaps “processes related to Internet Governance” would’ve been better.
On the other hand, it’s interesting to see the suggestion to the IGF to establish an annual policy discussion track.
Best,
Isra
Israel Rosas, Director, Partnerships and Internet Development Donate today. <https://bit.ly/3nUsQmJ>
*From: *wsis20 <wsis20-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Fiona Alexander < fionaa@american.edu> *Date: *Thursday, 27 June 2024 at 8:12 a.m. *To: *wsis20@ICANN.org <wsis20@icann.org> *Subject: *[wsis20] GDC Rev 2
Hi to all
Attached is the new rev 2 of the Global Digital Compact. It's 14 pages now and I haven't yet had the time to read through carefully, but at first blush some decent things continue re: Internet governance. However, some challenging items continue re: AI and then the follow up and implementation. The latter in particular still is creating centralized levers in the UN New York sphere, which this whole exercise continues to prove is not adept at involving stakeholders in a meaningful way or operating in a transparent and open manner.
Look forward to hearing others reactions.
Fiona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiona Alexander
Distinguished Policy Strategist in Residence, School of International Service
Distinguished Fellow, Internet Governance Lab
Executive Advisor, Khan Cyber and Economic Security Institute
American University _______________________________________________
Learn more about the WSIS+20 Outreach Network and review relevant resources: https://go.icann.org/wsis20
Read the public archives for this mailing list: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wsis20/
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (11)
-
AHM Bazlur Rahman -
Chalmers, Susan -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr -
Cheryl Miller -
Fiona Alexander -
Israel Rosas -
Joly MacFie -
Jordan Carter -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond -
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy -
Veni Markovski