[IRP] Conference call: Thursday 19th August, 4pm CET

Michael Gurstein gurstein
Thu Aug 12 20:09:13 EEST 2010

I agree with Parminder on the below concerning the term "user" and have
running debates mostly with techies on this term which narrows the spectrum
of concerns/interests under consideration only to those within a narrowly
technological framework.  
Some other term such as "citizen" (in the context of "global citizenship"
rather than "national citizenship") is probably preferred and links the
discussion quite directly into issues of the "rights" of "citizens" rather
than the affordances of technologies.
Mike Gurstein

-----Original Message-----
From: irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
[mailto:irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org] On Behalf Of
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 8:56 AM
To: irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
Subject: Re: [IRP] Conference call: Thursday 19th August, 4pm CET

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.



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.



From: irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
[mailto:irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org] On Behalf Of
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

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.



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 19th 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,


*	Conference Room Number: 1981070 

To use the HiDef ConferencingT 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] On Behalf Of Lisa
Sent: 29 July 2010 18:34
To: irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
Cc: 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 7th 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

The Charter is also on Google docs here:

QeZPYlHCAo&hl=en&authkey=CIWByMwN> &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).

zR1VKa2c&hl=en#gid=0> &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:

29th July - 13th August: Coalition members comment on the Charter by
email/Google docs.

Possible date - 19TH August: Conference call to discuss outstanding issues
and changes (exact date and time tbc.)

23rd - 27th 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) and Dixie (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 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   <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


IRP mailing list

IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/pipermail/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org/attachments/20100812/cb2d3457/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/cb2d3457/attachment-0001.gif>

More information about the IRP mailing list