[IRP] Conference call: Thursday 19th August, 4pm CET
parminder
parminder
Thu Aug 12 18:55:50 EEST 2010
Thanks for your response, Lisa.
On using the term 'users' or 'Internet users', I have two issues
One, the rights that we speak of here extend even to those who may not
directly use the Internet, but can , mostly are, affected by it.
Secondly, in the universe of terms describing human beings as social
actors, the term 'user' has been added from the technology side to the
existing terms like consumer and citizen. It is obvious that the term
that we choose to use among all these has important overall
implications. What I dont like about the term 'user' in social discourse
is that use of this term seeks to define human beings in relation to
technology rather vice versa.
Thanks
Parminder
On Thursday 12 August 2010 02:28 PM, Lisa Horner wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments everyone -- keep them coming!
>
> Parminder -- I agree with your concerns, thanks for highlighting the
> issue. Businesses have certain legal rights, but one would never
> frame them as human rights. I think that it's a case of ambiguity in
> the language, and we need to get it right. My immediate reaction was
> to replace "stakeholders" in the text you highlighted with "internet
> users". But then I guess businesses are users as well. Maybe "all
> individuals who use the internet". Would be good to hear the experts'
> thoughts on this as we move forwards.
>
> RE anonymity -- another important issue that clearly requires more
> thought and discussion.
>
> Best,
>
> Lisa
>
> *From:* irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> [mailto:irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org] *On Behalf
> Of *parminder
> *Sent:* 11 August 2010 17:47
> *To:* irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> *Subject:* Re: [IRP] Conference call: Thursday 19th August, 4pm CET
>
> Hi All
>
> I read part 1 of the charter from the link given below (could not open
> part 2, can someone point me to the link)
>
> I was pleasantly surprised, and found the text very good. Dont know
> why and how, but I have tried to read the charter text a couple of
> times earleir, the last time just a few weeks back, and always got
> struck at the part in para 3 or so which mentioned something to the
> effect that IG policies are the responsibility of all stakeholders,
> governments, private sector, civil society etc who are to be treating
> as equals in this respect. (Not the exact words but close by I think.)
>
> I was not able to accept a human rights instrument which sought to
> give businesses the same political standing as governments, and this
> issue was so basic to me that I saw no point in going beyond.
>
> However, this new text is very different, and quite good. Congrats to
> its drafters. I would try to offer more specific inputs later on but
> at this time I wish to make just one point.
>
> The text still speaks of stakeholder's rights, while defining
> stakeholders as governments, civil society, businesses etc... In my
> opinion we should only refer to human rights - individual or
> collective, but not rights of institutions or organization, certainly
> not of businesses. Experts in human rights can tell me more about it,
> but I think no human rights instrument refers to such corporate
> rights, and creating a new class of these rights is outrightly
> dangerous, while being expressly wrong, esp as part of a human rights
> document.
>
> My problem is with the following kind of text in the draft
>
> All internet stakeholders are equal before the law and are entitled
> without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.
>
> All stakeholders on the internet have duties and responsibilities as
> well as rights
>
> While it is ok to put responsibilities on other stakeholders, we
> should only refer to rights for humans, and not organizations/
> institutions, and certainly not corporates, in this document.
>
> Thanks
>
> Parminder
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday 11 August 2010 04:52 PM, Lisa Horner wrote:
>
> Dear all
>
> Thanks to people who have commented on the Charter so far. As we
> discussed before, there will be a conference call next week to give
> coalition members the chance to ask the experts questions about the
> text, and for them to explain to you what they have done.
>
> The call will be on Thursday 19^th September at 15.00 UK / 16.00 CET.
> Wolfgang has confirmed that he can make that time, and I hope some of
> the other experts will also be able to join us. I hope that coalition
> members can make it. If you can't but would still like to discuss the
> Charter, please let me know and we will try to work something out.
>
> It would be very useful if people make written comments before the
> call so that we can structure the discussion and allow the experts to
> consider them in advance.
>
> The numbers to join the call are below.
>
> All the best,
>
> Lisa
>
> * Conference Room Number: *1981070*
>
> *To use the HiDef Conferencing^(TM) service, you may call from:*
>
> *Skype (free):*
>
>
>
>
> Participants: +9900827041981070
>
>
>
> Start Skype as Participant
>
> *Phone (Toll):*
>
> From United States: +1 (201) 793-9022
> From Canada: +1 (201) 793-9022
> From Austria: +43 (0) 82040115470
> From Belgium: +32 (0) 7 0357134
> From France: +33 (0) 826109071
> From Germany: +49 01805009527
> From Ireland: +353 (0) 818270968
> From Italy: +39 848390177
> From Spain: +34 (9) 02885791
> From Switzerland: +41 (0) 8 48560397
> From United Kingdom: +44 (0) 8454018081
>
>
>
> *From:* irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> <mailto:irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
> [mailto:irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Lisa Horner
> *Sent:* 29 July 2010 18:34
> *To:* irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> <mailto:irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
> *Cc:* irp-charter at rp.lip6.fr <mailto:irp-charter at rp.lip6.fr>
> *Subject:* [IRP] Charter of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet
>
> Dear all
>
> Please find attached the draft of the Charter that the expert group
> has been working on. I think it's a great piece of work, so thanks to
> everyone...coalition members and experts alike. It's a really
> exciting step forwards for the coalition...hopefully worth the wait!
>
> Please read it through and make any comments or ask any questions that
> you have. We will gather all of the comments, and the expert group
> will take them into consideration as best as they can. We will then
> have a final version 1.0 of the Charter ready for the planned
> consultation with the Council of Europe (and hopefully EBU and maybe
> others too) on 7^th September, and to present at the IGF in Vilnius.
>
> At that stage, there are still likely to be outstanding areas and
> points for discussion that we feel we need to work on. We have
> already started to collate some of the main points for discussion that
> arose during the work of the expert group (I've attached the version
> with those points for discussion here too). After Vilnius, the plan
> is to consult on the Charter more widely, helping to improve the text
> and get more individuals and organizations involved. We need to
> decide on a strategy for doing that -- we can discuss that at the IGF
> (and also remotely for those who won't be there).
>
> The Charter is also on Google docs here:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=10dSNV0OMkFEZ3KrVDWCXou1an6gJP6uqJQeZPYlHCAo&hl=en&authkey=CIWByMwN
> <https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=10dSNV0OMkFEZ3KrVDWCXou1an6gJP6uqJQeZPYlHCAo&hl=en&authkey=CIWByMwN>
>
> To make comments, please send an email either to the list, or to me
> personally if you'd rather. Please refer to the exact Article and
> page number that you are referring to when you make your comments and
> questions. Please also be as precise as possible, proposing concrete
> solutions or suggestions if you want something to be changed. For
> example, if you are unhappy with the language of a section, please
> suggest alternative language. If you would like to insert something
> into the Charter that is missing, please suggest the addition as an
> article in language that is consistent with the current style of the
> Charter, and also explain why you think it should be included.
>
> You can also comment directly on the Google Doc by highlighting the
> relevant text and clicking "insert" and then "comment". Please DON'T
> make your comments in tracked changes on the word document attached
> here as the email may bounce back due to it being too large (the
> current email size permitted is very limited at the moment). It would
> also make it quite difficult to collate the comments and changes.
>
> As we discussed on the Conference call, the second section of the
> Charter is still incomplete. Please feel free to comment on the text
> that is there, and start to work to fill in the gaps if you have
> time. The link to the google doc of section 2 is here, if anyone
> wants to start to add new bundles of rights. (please don't edit what's
> there on this version...just add new bits if you'd like to).
>
> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArEcBWyGO2nQdEdBTlNuTHNxUXVSaml1RUdzR1VKa2c&hl=en#gid=0
> <http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArEcBWyGO2nQdEdBTlNuTHNxUXVSaml1RUdzR1VKa2c&hl=en#gid=0>
>
> We'll try and get a better system up and running to gather comments
> when we consult more widely on the Charter at and after the IGF.
>
> I suggest the following timescale:
>
> 29^th July -- 13^th August: Coalition members comment on the Charter
> by email/Google docs.
>
> Possible date - 19^TH August: Conference call to discuss outstanding
> issues and changes (exact date and time tbc.)
>
> 23^rd -- 27^th August: Finalisation of Version 1.0
>
> As it is the holiday season at the moment, I hope that this will give
> everyone an opportunity to comment. If you are away but want to
> participate, please let me know and we can try to work around it.
>
> As always -- any comments, questions and ideas are always welcome. I
> will be away with very limited access to email until next Thursday.
> But Wolfgang (wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at
> <mailto:wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at>) and Dixie
> (Dixie at global-partners.co.uk <mailto:Dixie at global-partners.co.uk>)
> might be able to answer any immediate queries.
>
> Finally, I'd like to say thank you to the expert group for all of
> their work on this. And an extra HUGE thank you to Wolfgang Benedek
> who has done a lot of work and has really driven the process forwards.
>
> All the best,
>
> Lisa
>
> ___________________________________________________________
>
> *Lisa Horner*
>
> *Head of Research & Policy **Global Partners and Associates*
>
> 338 City Road, London, EC1V 2PY, UK
>
> Office: + 44 207 239 8251 Mobile: +44 7867 795859
>
> *LisaH at global-partners.co.uk <mailto:lisah at global-partners.co.uk>
> **www.global-partners.co.uk <http://www.global-partners.co.uk/> *
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org <mailto:IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/pipermail/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org/attachments/20100812/c6256474/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 4178 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/pipermail/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org/attachments/20100812/c6256474/attachment-0001.gif>
More information about the IRP
mailing list