[nncoalition] Request for Comments; Net Neutrality Policy Statement(s)
jmalcolm at eff.org
Mon Apr 13 04:34:36 CEST 2015
At our meeting in Manila I also mentioned that there is a proposed "deliberative poll" planned as an IGF pre-event, which, contrary to the IGF itself, would be a very outcome-oriented process, and is considering dealing with net neutrality as a topic. Although it remains at an early stage, a state of play presentation about the deliberative poll will be given at the Freedom Online Coalition in Mongolia next month. I have very little faith (borne from a decade of experience) that the IGF will produce any concrete messages this year, so I want to flag the deliberative poll option again as a fallback that might have a better chance of producing something.
Nonetheless, I'll also consult internally about whether there is a net neutrality policy statement that EFF could propose for this process.
On Apr 9, 2015, at 11:26 AM, LB at lucabelli.net wrote:
> Dear all,
> This is a Request for Comments with regard to the development of one or
> more DRAFT Net Neutrality Policy Statement(s) to be discussed within the
> IGF community at large.
> The development of one or more DRAFT Net Neutrality Policy Statement(s)
> aims at promoting the endorsement of an agreed position on net
> neutrality by the IGF community, based on the Model Framework on Network
> Neutrality developed by the Dynamic Coalition on Network Neutrality (DC
> The Model Framework was presented at the 8th IGF in Bali and
> subsequently delivered to the Council of Europe Steering Committee on
> Media and Information Society that used it as a working document for the
> elaboration of a Draft Recommendation on Net Neutrality.
> To date, the Model Framework has been conveyed to several Parliamentary
> assemblies (EU Parliament, Argentinian Senate and South Korean
> Parliament) by DC NN members. However, although it has already played an
> inspirational role, the model has never been officially validated by the
> IGF community at-large. This lack of validation is primarily due to the
> lack of an official validation process for DCs outcomes within the IGF
> During the RightsCon joint meeting of the DCNN and GNN, consensus
> emerged as regards the elaboration of one or more DRAFT Net Neutrality
> Policy Statement(s) to be presented to the IGF MAG and discussed - and
> hopefully endorsed - by the IGF community at-large (see email below for
> further info).
> The development of the Policy Statement(s) will be consistent with the
> Final Chair's Summary of the last IGF, according to which “The ninth
> IGF concluded with looking at the role of the IGF in taking the network
> neutrality discussion forward. [...] The Dynamic Coalition on Network
> Neutrality will continue the discussions leading up to the 2015 meeting,
> but the view was also held that there was a need to develop a process
> that allowed the entire IGF community to weigh in and validate the
> findings of the Dynamic Coalition.”
> According to DC NN Rules of Procedure, this RFC designates two drafters
> in order to “manage the elaboration of the position or statement and
> consolidate received comments with the aim of achieving a consensus
> document.” (http://www.networkneutrality.info/about.html)
> The two individuals who volunteered as drafters are:
> - Luca Belli, DCNN Co-Chair and Researcher at the Center for Technology
> and Society, FGV Rio de Janeiro
> - Michał Woźniak, Warsaw Hackerspace and Polish Linux Users Group
> All interested individuals will be allowed to propose DRAFT policy
> statements and to provide any comments to this RFC by 25 April.
> An initial DRAFT consensus documents will be provided no later than 5
> Subsequently, “Members will be provided with 14 calendar days to
> comment, followed by a revised draft, and 10 calendar days to comment
> the revised draft,” as foreseen by the DCNN Rules of Procedure.
> Ideally we should elaborate one or more Policy Statement(s) by the end
> of May, so that these statements may be discussed in the widest number
> of IG fora before the IGF. A calendar of all national and regional IGFs
> preceding the UN IGF will be shared soon.
> Thanks in advance for your comments and inputs!
> All the best,
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [global-nn] Net Neutrality Policy Statement(s) for IGF
>> From: <LB at lucabelli.net>
>> Date: Tue, March 31, 2015 4:00 pm
>> To: nncoalition at mailman.edri.org, global-nn at lists.riseup.net
>> Dear all (apologies for the long email),
>> Two weeks ago a conference-call for IGF dynamic coalitions’
>> coordinators took place and during the call it was reiterated that any
>> outcomes elaborated by the DCs should be validated by the IGF community
>> at-large. This is a clear call for broader validation of net neutrality
>> ideas built on the model framework as elaborated by the DC on Network
>> Neutrality (available here
>> http://www.networkneutrality.info/sources.html )
>> The need for validation of the DC NN work by the IGF community at-large
>> is absolutely understandable. However, as you may know, there is no
>> official procedure foreseen by the IGF in order to put in place such a
>> validation. During the 'RighsCon net neutrality lunch', members of the
>> DC NN and the Global Coalition on Net Neutrality (GNN) met to discuss
>> potential synergies and it was suggested that some policy messages based
>> on the model framework may be jointly elaborated and promoted and,
>> lastly, proposed for endorsement at the IGF (either in the last part of
>> the DC NN meeting or during a main session TBD).
>> The text of the policy message(s) could be elaborated in the form of one
>> or more common statements, as foreseen by the DC NN Rules of
>> Procedure(the RoP are publicly available on the ‘about’ page of the
>> DC NN website). The elaboration of such policy message(s) would be not
>> only a unique occasion to set a global net neutrality norm, potentially
>> endorsed by the IGF community, but also a unique occasion to prove that
>> the IGF can produce outcomes, when there is will to do so. By all means,
>> the elaboration of several policy messages would increase chances that
>> consensus may crystallise at least around one of them.
>> It is obvious that such an ambitious effort has greatest chances to
>> succeed if the DC NN will act in synergy with the GNN so that the policy
>> message(s) will be promoted, discussed and commented in the widest
>> number of fora (particularly within national and regional IGFs) and
>> then, when the final product will be ready, it will be conveyed to the
>> The proposed way forward may look as follows:
>> 1) Share a proposal according to DC NN Rules of Procedure that will
>> encourage the development of draft policy message(s). The proposed
>> drafts may be publicly circulated on the DC NN mailing-list or privately
>> sent to the Coordinators.
>> 2) The coordinators would then circulate all the received drafts as well
>> as a consolidated version and ask DC NN members to endorse one or more
>> policy statements.
>> 3) DC NN coordinators would forward all policy statements with
>> endorsements to the IGF MAG. All interested individuals may act as 'MN
>> policy message ambassadors' promoting the discussion of the messages
>> within national and regional IGFs or other relevant fora.
>> 4) The people who proposed the policy statements will be invited to
>> talk about their proposal at the IGF (either during the DC NN meeting or
>> during the main session, if there will be one)
>> 5) DC NN & GNN will meet at the end of the IGF (and organising a further
>> conference-call, if necessary) to coordinate and foster a single and
>> strong policy statement.
>> Please feel free to share your comments on this idea and, should you
>> agree with it, your suggestions on how to put this project in place.
>> All the best,
> NNcoalition mailing list
> NNcoalition at mailman.edri.org
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jmalcolm at eff.org
Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD
Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:
More information about the NNcoalition