[Rigf_program] Further topic for the Tokyo agenda

[Wu Kuo]

It is a great news. We should welcome anyone who are interested in this issue since it is very critical now. Let me try to explain why?

1. As people followed the history of Internet governance, ITU and some countries actually try very hard to put internet under UN control (such as WSIS 2000~2005). And the outcome of WSIS is "UN/IGF". For ITU and those countries, they are not satisfied with the result form WSIS (PenHwa, Izumi, and many of us know the story).

2. When UN/IGF in process (from 2006,..), ITU and those countries continue their effort to make the influence to "Internet Community" under certain control (and we know which organization eager to have the right). If I remembered, the UN representative said in Egypt meeting "I don't understand why you continue to talk, talk, talk, but not develop "solution"". Unfortunately, his talk was not be appreciated in general. At the last day of the meeting, only two (more than 80+) on stage to support his asking. People insisted "IGF is a forum to exchange idea and sharing experience, not to make solution or decision". The he didn't show up at Vilnius meeting. And IGF continue to operate from 2011 to 2015.

3. Now, ITU and those countries try to create another "battlefield" which is ITU's event - WCIT. They try to use the ITU "antiquated diplomatic rituals" (as Economist said) to play their game. Once the "battlefield" move from IGF to WCIT, the multi-stakerholder mechanism will not work. ITU strictly play "delegate system" which means "we have no say" (we include - industry, academic, consumer, civil society,…).

So if more people willing to join this session, we should welcome them. That is my point. Hopefully, we agree.

Kuo Wu   


Yoshihiro Obata 於 2012/5/15 下午2:48 寫道：

> I received a call from Google Japan that Google Inc. was contacted by
> some people in this MSG and was asked to contribute to the APrIGF. I
> heard that they have strong interest in the WCIT issue.
> Although this is their headquarter issue, I suggested that they work
> through their Japan office (especially for funding) and me so that I can
> work for the arrangement inside the MSG. I will soon forward their
> proposal and if necessary (which means that if their proposal is part of
> a session, which is likely), I would like to work with the people
> interested in this issue to arrange a session or several sessions.
> Additionally, AT&T Japan is saying that AT&T is also very interested in
> this issue. When the arrangement starts, I might be able to pull them in
> if we want.
> 
> Yoshihiro Obata
> 
> 
> (2012/05/12 20:08), Wu Kuo wrote:
>> 3. "Confrontation on Internet", which we can have some one to describe SOPA/PIPA in US congress, some one talk about the development on ACTA in EC, and some one talk about the topic can be happened in IGF/Baku (Paul might be a good person, since he is a member of MAG). As I know, Dr. William Drake is coming to the APrIGF, he is a wright person to talk about the possible political development in WCIT. If necessary, I can be the moderator if no one want to be. :-)
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rigf_program mailing list
> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program


_______________________________________________
Rigf_program mailing list
Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program