Internet for youth - beyond safety issues

IGF 2010

VILNIUS, LITHUANIA

17 SEPTEMBER 10

SESSION 69

0900

INTERNET FOR YOUTH –

BEYOND SAFETY ISSUES





***

Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during Fifth Meeting of the IGF, in Vilnius. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the session, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.



***





>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Good morning, everybody, thank you for joining our workshop.  So the title is "Internet for Youth - Beyond Safety Issues".  We want today to talk to other issues related to youth and we don't want to restrict ourself to safety and other.  Those kind of problems.  But we want to see the positive side of youth participation on Internet Governance from a different perspective.  That's why we split our workshop in three sub components or three subtopics we will start first to talk about copyright from young or youth perspective.  Then we'll move to more about capacity building and education for youth with more case study about that.  And then we will finish more about I would say the involvement of young people on democratic process.  So we will try to see with different case study, with different experience how young people are positively engaged.



So maybe just we will wait a little bit because we don't a remote moderator yet.  And we are just waiting for some -- yeah, for some panelists.  But maybe Joonas should be starting.

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  I'm going to use the microphone and stand up.  Okay.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Just to introduce this is Joonas Makinen from Electronic Frontier Finland and he's here for IGF.  And we're happy that he will show us -- talk about copyright from a real practical perspective.

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  Thank you.  Yes, I'm from Electronic Frontier Finland.  We're basically an organisation who tries to cover your civil rights especially online and if we want to say more about copyright I'm also familiar on this area because I'm a musician and writer and so on.  

This will be a little bit of mess I'm sorry about that in the presentation because I was supposed to do this with a colleague but he's unfortunately sick this morning so we had to improvise a bit and apparently I also have to back up for one additional person concerning what I have to cover so this will be quite a lot.  

So I really encourage people to discuss these issues, as well.  

Go ahead for the first one.  So the slides will be mostly just about what I'm talking about.  

During my time of political activity, I've met quite many people.  Those who are in power.  Those make legislation, make rules and decisions.  And one of the most common things I've noticed is that those people happen to be old.  Or older.  And what I saw was quite -- what I saw to correlate was that a lot of those people don't know much about technology.  In fact, there are people from constitutional committees who say Internet is a new media.  That's when I tell them Internet is 40 years old.  

Many of them may seem to think that Internet is some sort of one-way connection or it represents just new television or newspaper or radio or something like that.  

But I have to tell you, at least the youth knows better.  Of course there are exceptions to older people, as well.  And they are lovely exceptions.  It is amazing to find people who still have ideas and are willing to learn and adapt to technology.  

And this is an important thing because technology is changing all the time.  And unlike some many people think, it's not irrelevant to legislation.  It's not irrelevant to how we should rule things.  

One of the things is that if we talk about this culture, there are many paradigms to change.  

Internet changed a lot.  Social media has changed a lot we went from listening to broadcasting from reading to writing and from simply passively enjoying stuff to actively participating and this applies to all ages who simply use the Internet and this is an amazing thing.  And sadly legislation and many governing ideas follow quite late.  

And one very important thing to realise is there is no longer or if there ever was a clear distinction between creators of works and consumers.  

At the moment we are living in so-called read of rights culture where everyone who simply has connections to Internet is able to contribute a lot to the culture.  It doesn't mean you're publishing a book it doesn't mean you're making code or come posing an opera but you are affecting it.  And you have very -- your chances to affect others have also increased.  You can connect to so many people with modern technology.  

So we have to think of everyone as individuals, as citizens and not just try to categorize, force people into consumers of works and people who make them.  

Every one of you is doing both.  

And also how we communicate has changed through technology in a very important way.  

When previously let's say before the Internet we were mostly talking about physical items which of course are scars, you have only a limited number of them.  And if you want to tell your best friend about it, if you wanted to promote it, you either have to give it away or simply talk about it.  That was all the reference you could give.  

Today you can link to things and if you want to tell your friend:  Hey, this is a funny photo, what do you do?  You actually send the photo itself in a visual form.  What happens today when you want to have a family member listen to a song what happens you send the song itself or a link to the place you can find the song some with videos and so on everybody is spreading links from YouTube all the time.  This is a very different approach to referring to different cultural works than before.  

And this is something our current legislation is not ready for.  

So if you move to the next slide.  Sorry; these are just made quick because -- and changed very quick because my partner was supposed to talk in more detail about some of the things.  

So we are talking about the works, works of art that people use to communicate with.  

We distribute photos, videos, music and so on and every one of us writes.  

We're talking about works.  And there is one very global piece of legislation that's copyright that governs this area.  And I do have to mention here that depending on the language which you're using the copyrights word might have a different meaning.  When I'm talking about copyrighting I could just talk about the right to -- copyright to make the copies and not intellectual property which by the way a misnomer there's no such thing as intellectual property.  We're talking about copyright legislation and that's a different thing completely.  

So copyright is very globally harmonized legislation.  

It contains moral rights and economic rights you could say it's an incentive to encourage people to create more.  So that they can actually be sure that if I make something, at least I get attributed as the creator or I could make money with it.  Nobody else is stealing my fame and so on.  

Of course there have always been problems with the whole system.  And we can always argue who actually benefits most from all of the legislation.  

But I would like to believe idealistically that yes, it's nice that we have some sort of -- some sort of legislation that actually like relieves our worries a bit concerning the works we are doing.  

But now every day everyone is participating more in creation.  That's why copyright has become more and more urgent and more important for all of us.  

And I do want to point out that this is a matter of legislation.  It's not any sort of natural thingy.  

So for example in Finland, we might have different law a little bit different than here in Lithuania and EU legislation directives say something a little bit different.  

All right.  If you go to the next one.  

So I'm also here backing up for a person who is supposed to talk about Creative Commons.  So I have to cover that, as well.  And what this is about -- and if we by default create something, anything, text, graphics, video, music, anything, then all the rights we have in our legislation apply.  Every single one of them.  

You have the right to be acknowledged as the author.  

That's an important thing.  Nobody else can steal your fame from it.  

Economic rights.  You know, people can't sell your stuff without your permission.  

And also the copyright, which means you or anyone you have given the right to has the exclusive right to decide how many copies are made.  That's how the legislation is at the moment.  

But we don't have to actually use all of these rights.  They are just rights.  

You can give them away if you wish to.  But by default, everything applies.  

And one thing that has been found by many people, very useful, is to ignore the copyright part.  You can leave other stuff.  But make sure that on the Internet where distribution is practically free and very easy, everyone can copy and share it.  And we have different sort of models for these and ways to encourage people to spread what they have.  And make sure that it's actually in the comments for everyone to use and learn about them.  

Every single work is -- could be said that it's a derivative work.  You get ideas from somewhere.  Get inspiration.  They don't come out of nowhere.  

So it's a good thing to have a lot of material around you that you can think about, use perhaps directly, perhaps indirectly perhaps you only want to cite, perhaps you only subconsciously know that something has affected you.  So Creative Commons is an organisation that provides licenses concerning copyrights.  The many idea is that we don't restrict copying.  But we can have other stuff.  

The next slide.  

Encourage copying and remixing.  Remixing is a very important thing today.  More important than I cost before the Internet.  Because it's more easier now to digitally combine different sort of works and put new points out.  

I hope you have all seen lovely video remixes on YouTube, mashups and all sorts of stuff.  And in fact very many old, old writing in area of prose were actually -- how should I put it?  They were great and they were congratulated that they used material from so many others.  It's just how you put the things together, prose.  Remixing has always been there.  And these are the two main things that are encouraged.  

So the point in a nutshell is that we have some sort of plan to bring copyright in practice up to modern standards although legislation might be lacking when technology has changed so fast and we know in the political environment things change very slowly.  

In a nutshell, it's not all rights reserved.  It's some rights reserved.  

The next one, please.  

So I couldn't really find a good picture here.  So I'm just going to talk about what's the point -- what is more -- more details about Creative Commons.  You can copy and share, that's the whole point.  But of course you need some rights.  Of course you want so.  

Creative Commons is a license where you use certain parameters.  You add those interesting two-letter combinations and that tells you what other people can do with your stuff.  

The first and the most important thing is BY.  That means you're attributed as the author.  Whenever people use your work, they must mention you as the creator.  

If you don't want this, that's okay, as well.  That means your word goes to public domain.  That means everyone -- nobody acknowledges you.  It's common stuff for everyone to use.  But usually I would say that by is a pretty good thing to have after that.  

Then NC.  Of course some people want to go very commercial.  Some people want to go very non-commercial and -- and NC means non-commercial if you want to add this attribute at the end of your Creative Commons license, you don't want others to use it commercially.  

Just to clarify, of course you can make a deal with everyone.  Everyone separately.  That's not a problem.  But by default you are not allowed to use this non-commercially.  But if you don't have that tag over there, that means just as long as you are mentioned as the creator, you can use the work.  You can sell it.  You can make remixing and -- remixes and sell those and so on.  

ND means no derivatives and that's sort of interesting because that's something you cannot actually stop people from doing.  There is no way you can stop people using works and modifying them and making fun out of them on the Internet.  

But of course, that is about how people modify your work and then how they can use it.  

SA calls for a sticky.  One of the interesting aspects of Creative Commons is it tries to be well spreading.  It's a virus.  If you put SA there it means people can use your work, make remixes, derivative works, but those new works must be licensed in the same way, as well.  And that's sort of the -- it's sort of a way to make sure that this thing keeps free.  So that everything you've made will be freely distributable in the future, as well.  Yeah, go ahead, next one.  

There is some troubles with copyright that my colleague -- Markku Rasanen was supposed to talk about well unfortunately I have to do myself and give the talk on that, as well.  But before that actually I want to mention about a Creative Commons how big it is.  If you've never heard of it, it's interesting.  Because one of the biggest places that use Creative Commons license is Wikipedia for their articles and there are many of them.  

DeviantART for artists.  And there are many other services which actually default to Creative Commons licenses to make sure that sort of Internet culture stays accessible and open.  Not perhaps free as -- but free as -- as well some say speech.  

And I think there was some sort of approximation.  In 2008 there was 130 million works of art licenses under Creative Commons and I think like last year or this year was already several hundred millions.  So we're talking about quite a big phenomena here.  

Well, trouble with copyright.  

Why did I talk about the change in culture and how people communicate these days?  

This is where the problem comes from.  It has many -- many points of view.  But the main idea is that legislation is lagging behind.  It hasn't noticed how people -- especially young people who are pretty quick to use new technology and develop new sorts of communication on the Internet for example, it's not up to date.  And that's why there are certain situations where they don't really work together.  

For example, if I talk about sending links to videos or sending photos, sending music, then if any of that music, any of those -- even those photos even if it's a funny cat with a caption on it is from an unauthorized source and you don't have the permission to copy it as in the copyright, then you are acting against the legislation, against the law if you just send it to your friend.  

Because on the Internet and digital world sending means you are copying it.  Downloading means you're copying it.  

If you go on YouTube and you look up a video, you find something interesting.  You can't possibly know perhaps if it's from an authorized source.  It could be.  And many videos actually are there so that the rights holders have accepted it.  They are perhaps making money out of it they are maybe using it for advertisement, which is a very good plan.  But you as a normal visitor or video watcher might not know it.  

But if it's from an unauthorized source and you watch it that means you have created a local copy of the file on your computer.  And that's a copyright infringement.  And everyone does that pretty much every day without even noticing.  

Well, these Creative Commons and other sorts of like healthy and co-operative ways of trying to put things together more easily, they could be in harmony with the modern legislation, as well but we people who use Internet all the time we don't really have a choice because many of the old powers who are used to the old legislation and yes I don't want to demonize too much but we are talking about record industries and Hollywood and so on now even book publishers they are used to their old methods of making money and doing advertising and so on.  And that creates a problem because people by nature, they don't really like change.  It might be scary.  And they have been fighting very hard.  

And it has actually only been very harmful to consumers, to citizens.  We're talking about blackmailing letters as in pay this in this amount of stuff or we'll sue you.  And we can't keep that as fair as long as we actually believe by default that that institution or that company which has a lawyer always wins.  There's not always just a single person -- just a regular young person who uses the Internet stuff for normal stuff, everyday stuff, actually is ready to face something like that when the person doesn't even know that he's done something wrong.  Yeah, of course everyone does it is not a good reason.  But legislation is delayed.  

For example, in Finland, just recently -- well recently one year ago approximately, one student got a letter.  And they demanded 3.6 million euros.  And of course they will never see the money.  No student ever has that.  

What he had done is he had hosted a direct Internet server I'm not sure of the evidence of whatever happened there.  But it's still too much.  It's scary.  The current form, the current system allows too much blackmailing fear.  And this is not a healthy environment for any culture.  

And in fact in Denmark one young person committed suicide.  

I'm pretty sure no artist or writer wants that.  



This hostile environment, this is the problem at the moment.  If nobody was like going after the biggest fans, those who let's say download music of their favorite band because they like it and of course show it to their friends because they are one of their biggest fans and they want people to know we wouldn't have such big problems but at the moment it's a pretty big fight we have to be very careful what's happening and follow very closely.  

And yeah, go ahead with the next one.  Because this is the main point I want to make:  In the current Internet environment, especially among young people who are the major users of technology, new technology.  I'm not saying in the amount of people would be youth, the major part.  But they are using it the most.  It has become impossible to use the Internet as we know it without breaking the law.  And this is not just a problem.  Adults, if you use YouTube, you're most likely unintentionally have broken the law.  And I would like to have a law that's clear.  And I certainly do not want that majority of the youth or the majority of the whole population on earth are criminals for doing something that they think is everyday and simple.  

And now pretty much we have covered all of these topics.  And please I invite every one of you, if you have some problems you would like to discuss about or ask about something or you know have you faced anything.  I'm going to sit over there by now so by me this is over so we're on the last slide and that's it.  Thank you.  

(Applause).

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you, Joonas.  It was really an enlightening presentation as myself I was involved in Creative Commons with Tunisia I'm happy we had an opportunity to talk about more copyright from this perspective of Creative Commons of how we can copy and remix content.  

Now maybe we can have some questions but I think it's better to move to the next panelist about education and Capacity Building Programme.  But before that I want to remind people if they are tweeting they can use the hash tab WUS 69 just to mention our workshop.  

Anyway, we will start now with Dmirty Epstein, who is from Cornell University and also a lucky ISOC ambassador.  

>> DMIRTY EPSTEIN:  Thank you, Rafik.  Thank you.  

We're kind of abruptly moving to a totally different subject.  And this is capacity building for youth participation in the Internet Governance debate.  And I was challenged this morning to give a Twitter version of what I'm going to say.  So for those of you who are tweeting, here is 139 character version of what I am going to say.  

And that is to be meaningfully involved in the IGF the young people have to be aware, informed and thoughtful about the Internet and Internet Governance processes.  So if you abbreviated Internet Governance it is 139 characters.  

So I think if you've been through workshops throughout the week, I think the theme of youth has been brought up numerous times.  I mean there were workshops about children, about young adults.  I think the idea that the young people should be more involved in the Internet Governance discussion is one of the common threads I think.  I've noticed a number of workshops throughout the week.  

And yet we don't see too much of that.  And I think this is because we're talking about a complex issue.  On the one hand, yes, we need the young voices, yes, the youth are the main -- the main group that is using and is affected by the Internet and whatever changes we introduce to the system.  At the same time, having young people participating for the sake of participating is not enough.  

We see many times you know a talking young person sitting on a panel.  And the views of young people kind of you know amusing, interesting.  Sometimes kind of shocking the system a little bit.  

But rarely taken into serious consideration.  And I would love to hear those that are disagreeing with me.  But that is my observation about how things are working.  

And the question is:  Why?  

Of course the young people bring a unique perspective on the Internet.  They are not confined by conventional thinking.  They ask questions that others are embarrassed to ask.  

So there is this -- there is a lot of ethics to being new to being fresh to be idealistic.  

At the same time in this environment which is a very complex environment where we are talking about Internet Governance, knowledge, experience, thoughtfulness take you a very long way.  

And sometimes the two conflict.  

And we are basically facing kind of two major issues here.  

So on the one hand we do want young people to be more involved.  On the other hand we want them to be involved meaningfully.  The assumption that the fact that we can use the Internet in innovative ways and we are highly digitally literate necessarily means that we can effectively get involved in Internet policy discussions.  I think this is a false assumption.  And I think there is a lot of that can be done and should be done in order for the young people to get meaningfully involved in the Internet Governance debates.  

And what brings me to this is I am a graduate student myself.  And we did a recent study that didn't focus on this specifically.  It was more how people use URLs in their daily online practices.  And as part of this study we asked people different questions to measure their skills their knowledge of various Internet aspects and although this doesn't cover Internet Governance at large there were a few numbers that kind of caught my attention.  So when we measure the Internet skills, our participants got 4.09 on a 5 point scale.  0 meaning not at all skillful and 5 meaning extremely skillful.  Which I think is pretty good.  

At the same time we did ask them -- the study was about URLs so we asked them about the knowledge of how the system works.  And here we are getting much less encouraging numbers.  

So for example, the self-stated level of knowledge of how URLs work was 3.13.  So just slightly above 3 on the scale of 5.  

Now if we actually measure the knowledge of different elements, they score even lower.  They score below 3.  So they think they know more than they actually may do.  

And this kind of triggered this thought in my mind that again like to be involved in a meaningful way, we need to raise awareness in people, we need to raise people.  And there is a huge need for capacity building.  

I encourage you to survey your friends or young people in your environment and just ask them what they know about Internet Governance or the way the Internet works.  

A friend of mine did this exercise even last night.  And she got asking people what do they know about Internet Governance and the answers ranged from huh to:  I don't know what it means but I know they want me to prevent from downloading music.  But no worries.  I can go around it.  

And I think this is not enough.  And I think this is exactly the kind of comment that make youth involvement and Internet policy discussion not being taken seriously.  

And I know that my colleagues and Raquel will probably talk more about how people can relate to Internet Governance how capacity can build but I think this is a core issue if we want to bring more young people into the Internet Governance debate.  

So to reiterate to be meaningfully in the Internet young people have to be aware, informed and thoughtful about the Internet and Internet Governance processes.  Looking forward to the discussion.  Thank you.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thanks, Dmirty, maybe we can have some questions now related to -- either to copyright or what Dmirty talks about, youth.  Maybe you have now enough time to do.  And then we can . . . any questions?  Okay.  Please.  Yes, can you please introduce yourself and I hope that we will have like Dmirty said 140 character question.  But you can . . .

>> JANICE RICHARDSON:  Janice Richardson, coordinator of the INSAFE Network.  I found it extremely interesting what you said but I think one thing that we do -- that we're troubled about young people's interventions is that you do tend to criticize what the older ones are doing.  But rarely do you come up with some really concrete examples.  And copyright, once again, and breaking the laws is a good example.  

So can you put forward -- you want things to change.  How do you want them to change?  Give us some concrete ideas on the changes that you would like to see so that we can all use Internet without breaking the law.  Thank you.  

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  Surely the most simple answer to this is change the law so that non-commercial file sharing is legal.  That's what it takes.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Just I want to say we are not here in a fight between old -- I don't like that word -- and young people.  We are just trying to show from what is happening from the youth perspective.  We are not going to fight -- we are not going into fighting words.

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  But indeed we need more discussion between everyone.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: It's a debate.  It's not we have two sides fighting against each other.  And we will have more concrete examples later.  

Please.  

>> ALUN MICHAEL:  In my experience as a legislator, if there's a simple answer, it's usually wrong.  Could you in giving that simple answer because you have obviously thought about this tell us what the downside of that is, I'm sure there must be downsides, unintended consequences of such a simple step.  Sorry.  Alun Michael, a member of Parliament from the UK.  

>> JOONAS MAKINEN: The downsides would indeed be quite a lot of shakeup in the modern models of delivering works and how to make money out of them.  New businesses -- it's going to take a lot of change for marketing models.  That's not -- that usually is not the youth problem.  

But if for example we did the change of legalizing non-commercial file sharing which means basically what everyone is doing and not the thing where you are for example selling pirated DVDs out there, that would take for example money from middlemen.  

It would take a lot of stuff that for example record industry, producers, all sorts of people who previously were in charge of making copies and logistics because they are not needed anymore.  So there will be a change.  It will be bad for them.  But it won't be bad for regular Internet users.  And yes, I'm willing to consider the discussion later in more detail if you want to.  

>> JILLIAN MERTSCH:  Jillian Mertsch.  And I don't know that I qualify as youth anymore but I've certainly had the Internet since I was ten years old and it's something I'm very aware of.  One of the discussions that always sort of strikes me when we talk about youth and the Internet and I wonder how much of it is just a matter of as people such as myself get older and become parents for example, I think Child Online Safety is somewhat of a joke because I know the Internet and I will know how to protect my child and I never see myself in a point where I won't understand the technology well enough that my children could get ahold of me.  

When you talk about copyright, I wonder, you mention that you were a musician.  An artist.  And I think as people our age stop going to the record companies and start putting all of our creative content in things like the Creative Commons, will the problem sort of solve itself in a way?  Because youth I don't think are as inclined to want to kind of work for the manna way.  And if they don't copyright their works then it sort of solved itself and granted it will take years because Hollywood is not going to get there but I think by and large the amount of content that I consume isn't produced by any sort of large production company.  It's sort of self generated.  So I just wanted sort of your reactions to whether or not you think this problem will to maybe a certain extent solve itself.

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  I agree with you.  Let's say if I think about young content creators today, it seems like it's self-evident that they are going -- it's going to circulate, they want it to circulate, spread as far as possible.  That's the default.  

And I see that the trend is exactly what you said.  It will go there.  It will take some time.  It will -- it can take a lot of time, depending how big this fight will be.  But it will go there eventually.  But the longer it takes, the more people get hurt.  

>> BRADLEY PERRY:  Bradley Perry from the Rushcliffe Youth Assembly.  Going to Dmirty's point about young people not only needing to get involved with more organisations like this but to have what they say taken into account more, with the Rushcliffe Youth Assembly we have done work with our Council and had Focus Groups of youths and adults and most of these cases it's found that the youth group turn out to be more efficient than the adult group, which shows that we have ways and methods of doing things which may contribute to all sorts of discussions.  I'm not saying that youth have a better idea of how to run things.  But just as -- if you're putting together a panel of adults, you see each person has their own way of contributing to an issue.  

And putting down an input and their skills to add.  

Young people also have these individual skills and have different perspectives that if you stop looking at a divide of young people and older people, perhaps then and just seeing everyone as people who have an interest in a subject perhaps we can move along and get everyone's views heard equally.  

>> DMIRTY EPSTEIN:  I think that's a good point and as I said I would like to cover this point this divide between young people and older people some are artificial and also the younger people become older so where do you start drawing the line.  

Of course young people bring a strength to the discussion.  And I think in many cases we -- even over the past few days we could see how it kind of enlightens the debate and breaking a few rules never -- doesn't hurt that much apparently.  I don't think like it contradicts or I didn't read it as such what I was saying before I think yes young people should be involved and I think the work being done by for example the youth coalition for Internet Governance giving people more room and not lacking silo sessions for the youth but actually being part of the discussion is a very important work the point I was trying to make that once the opportunity is given to expand it and to build on it, we just need to involve them in the discussions in a meaningful way.  And build on those strengths, the strengths which you just mentioned which are great.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  So maybe we can move now -- if we don't have more questions and we are running on time -- we can move to the next presentation from Mohammed Fathy, who is a member of Cyber Peace Initiative for the Suzanne Mubarak Women's International Peace Movement.  And he's the chair of the UNDESA-GAID Youth eLeaders Committee.  

>> MOHAMMED FATHY:  I see so many faces so I hope I won't be repetitive so I hope we can cover many concepts like empowerment, education, safety and others.  

First let me -- I'm going to speak about a case study.  So I'm going to relate my subject to Egypt specifically.  Telling about successful models taking place for youth participation.  And a successful model that can be replicated initially we are a country of 83 million.  A huge country.  And we have a very young population.  Almost 50% of our people are under the age of 25.  

Internet users over the last decade Egypt has witnessed a tremendous increase in the number of Internet users from around 200,000 users in the late '90s to 21 million in 2010.  

6.3% of them are under the age of 24.  3.4% are under the age of 17.  

So like half our Internet users are from youth.  

Educational system.  I'm going also to highlight and relate our model to the informal education attributes.  So actually in Egypt you have 40,000 schools.  And we have 16 million students.  Each year we have university graduates of 250,000.  So we have like an enormous number and we have a lot of youth who are looking for opportunities to participate and activate their role in their society.  

What we did was we created a model based on a voluntary basis.  We created a youth group related to organisations I would say a multistakeholder initiative initially initiated by Suzanne Mubarak cyberpeace movement others like the Minister of Communications and Information Technology some of the Private Sector companies, Microsoft, Cisco, Intel and others.  

What we did was we found youth in Egypt are using the Internet either in a non-effective way or sometimes in a dangerous way.  So we just created a team of young volunteers.  They call themselves Netaman.  Net referring to the Internet.  Aman is the Arabic word for safety.  They are mainly dedicated to disseminate the messages of Internet safety among their peers in society.  What happened here is we are all working on a voluntary basis.  The only way that attracted them is the only way -- their capacity is being conducted.  

For example, we always like -- spent years of suffering from the complicated educational system.  So we need now to just overcome that and come up with innovative things to resolve that so we came up with an educational system trying to conduct capacity building trainings in an interactive way.  What we are doing now that we are getting them involved, we are getting the information from them, getting them participating, we are hearing them out.  We are not giving any kind of constraints on what do you think.  We are giving them increased responsibilities.  Even the content they are conducting now to the business society, it is basically coming from the research and of course after being approved by our experts but mostly like 90% is coming from the youth themselves.  So we have now around 250 qualified young trainers.

Our whole system is based on the training of trainers.  So we have core teams, core team -- I'm sorry -- of co-founders who created the whole network.  There are around 11.  And we have 14 members.  We are around 30 now like in two months we will be around 45 disseminated over seven govern rates in Egypt.  And we have focus team members who are around now 175 members.  

So actually the whole network is being self managed by youth themselves who are giving them as I said increased responsibilities.  

Our training materials always have something to tackle social skills, how to be able to communicate with the audience how to be comfortable enough when addressing your messages.  

It is very surprising to know that now I have members who can handle like 300 of audience in the same room convincing them with their messages.  Excuse me.  Without being afraid.  

So this kind of confidence we are giving them.  This kind of self-running model, we are giving them the opportunity.  

Each of the 250 members is considered like a kind of Project Manager for specific tasks.  So each of them have like specific responsibilities, specific roles to be implemented in society.  

Now throughout this extended network, we reach around 50,000 of direct beneficiaries.  The audiences, they are listening to our awareness sessions.  In like nine months.  And now they are using the extended media like television, Internet to disseminate their messages, as well.  

Internet safety is one of the messages.  But actually the model -- it can accommodate any other messages like speaking about empowerment, maybe environment or any other messages.  

I would say that the keywords of what we did is empowerment.  We are giving them the opportunity to feel empowered.  And to be self managed.  

Of course under close supervision.  But the freedom scope is very wide.  

Also we are giving them non-traditional ways of education.  So it's -- I will tell you about -- a very surprising fact.  

Now we are inserting the Internet safety curriculums in our formal educational system.  Some of the parts inserted inside that materials or that curriculum are coming from youth.  

So they participated giving us the materials to put it inside the formal education system, which is a huge transition in the way how we are thinking now.  Huge.  

I would also say that creativity is a very important part of what we are doing.  Especially in the non-formal -- informal education.  

Our extended network of youth came up with like a lot of innovative ways to disseminate their messages easier.  Games, tutorials.  They came up with themselves.  

And now they are -- they became able to manage like the Government rates.  Each of the members have a plan to disseminate their plans in their govern rates and the govern rates in Egypt are around 20 -- Dr. Hosein is it 24?  We have 24, yes, now.  24 govern rates.  And so we are planning to expand into the upcoming 5 govern rates very soon.  

That's all I wanted to convey today on the messages about how -- how successful we can make our network when giving them like empowerment, increased responsibilities, innovative initiative to manage their thoughts freely.  Thank you.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you, Mohammed.  So we have that presentation.  Even we say we are going to talk about issues, but the panelists talking about children safety from the youth perspective and education.  

Now we move to the next speaker who is Raquel Gatto from Brazil.  She is from Network Information Centre in Brazil.  And she will present the Brazilian survey about kids.  

>> RAQUEL GATTO:  So good morning, everybody.  First of all, I'm sorry I was late.  I couldn't get a cab.  I was not expecting for that.  But here we are.  

So my name is Raquel.  And I'm from Brazil.  I work in the Network Information Centre which manages the .br and the IP addresses.  And for those that does not know we are a not-for-profit organisation so we use the money collected for domain names to projects like ISPs the training, and all of those that developed the Internet in Brazil and one of them that I would like to bring here while I was thinking youth beyond safety issues, I think it would be interesting to understand how many of youth is an -- on the Internet and what they are doing.  And that's some of the statistics we are running in Brazil.  There is one that will be launched, it's the first one in mid October.  We call ICT Kids.  Because it took the universe from five to nine years old.  And it's very interesting.  

So I'm not going to extend about sampling and so on.  So if anyone is interested, I can follow up later.  But since we are talking about or thinking about public policy making, we have usually five steps.  We have identifying the issues.  We have brainstorming the creation of the rules, norms.  Implementation.  And also monitoring.  And those stats goes for the first and the last phases.  

So this -- first of all, this survey was based on for the past five years we have run some research on IST households and IST enterprise the IST households brings us the information about the users with ten plus years old.  

So we were we were able to get some of the youth ideas.  But now with the five to nine years old, we could compare -- of course this is a divide.  We put a divide among the ages.  But it's very interesting to profile them.  

So first of all, users of computer.  We are talking about the main two -- the main ones that we have to access the Internet.  What we got was two questions.  One for parents or from the responsibles and one from the kids.  And it's pretty interesting because 44% of the parents or the responsibles said the kids were using the computer.  According to the kids, there were 57%.  So we get here one of the perspectives the parents perspectives about the kids use.  Maybe this can be explained because they are using in other places not only at home.  Although home is the main place they use it.  44% exactly said they use it at home.  And -- 40% said they use at school.  

But another interesting point about the user of the computer because before I go to Internet is that with the ten plus research, we got only 43% of users -- computer users.  So we see that kids, even under the perspective of the parents, the responsibles, they are using more or -- in the percentage, they are using more the computer.  

So going to Internet, we got the opposite stats.  Because the parents said 29% of the kids from five to nine use the Internet.  And the kids said that there were only 23%.  

We could think about their perception to go online or not.  But since we are talking about little people.  But those are the findings we got.  

And if we talk about the whole population, what we call whole population is ten plus because this is the first fresh research, we got almost 39% of Internet users.  Although if we go for some levels, we see that from 10 to 15 they are at 63% of users.  From 16 to 29, 68%.  Those are the most users -- the main users.  

But if we go to for example the -- they break from 45 to 59, we have 16% of users.  So we really know that youth are the main users.  That's one of the findings of this research.  

And when we talk about the place they are using, again, if we are -- we are talking about the Internet now, they are using it at home or the home of other relatives or neighbors.  So they are always in this space.  And where does this go?  Here we have for example 49% using the Internet at home and only 35 at schools.  

In Brazil we have a project from the Ministry of Education with bringing Internet to all schools.  This is the goal.  And they make an agreement with the telecoms to bring at least for one -- each seat in Brazil high school will have Internet.  

This is a project to foster not only access, how the kids will go there.  

And the main -- the funny part of the research is what they are doing there.  And those kids from five to nine.  

So 97% are playing games.  Okay?  We are talking about a universe who is not so eager readers or writers.  They are looking for cartoons.  They are looking for games for funny content.  

And only 46% use for some school-related research.  So this is -- this has to do with the educational purpose, also.  Even for them, even for those little people.  

And the interesting finding is the gap if you remember when I talk about computers, why I brought it, we have according to the kids 57% of computer users.  And only 23% of Internet users.  

Why do we have this gap?  I would like to bring you this debate.  And to see your thoughts about it.  

So the first one could be parenting control.  We are going to have a workshop I think in the afternoon about it.  But maybe parents allow kids to use the computer and not the Internet.  And then we go back to safety issues.  I know it's not the focus.  

But anyway.  

The second one:  Are they getting access to Internet so they got the computer but they do not get the Internet?  

And third one:  Is there enough content driven for kids from five to nine years old?  Is it important?  I think so.  We are talking about youth here.  And how to educate them.  

So we usually worry about what we take off the Internet.  But what do you -- we bring in?  That's one of the key issues.  

So I think this is pretty much -- I know it's boring to bring numbers.  But it's interesting why we always talk about it.  We are -- we need to have sometimes a concrete picture.  And just a last thing I was saying about activities, what they are doing:  I told about the kids playing games.  But not only the kids.  But the young people.  For example, from 10 to 15, 74% are using Internet for playing games online.  While for reading newspaper for example, only 18% use the Internet from 10 to 15.  

Could we develop a newspaper driven for youth?  I'm just brainstorming with you some of the ideas we could take off these numbers.  

Just one interesting thing for downloading -- sorry; for watching videos in YouTube, it's pretty much the same in all ages.  So we have -- if we go for example from 10 to 15, it's 58.  If we go to 35 to 44, we have 41.  So there is a gap.  But it's pretty much closed.

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  Yeah I mentioned that in YouTube it's very global for everyone.  

>> RAQUEL GATTO:  Exactly.  So anyway, this survey will be launched mid October.  I just decided to bring you some early results.  And if you want to see it, it will be in English at NIC.br.  And that's it.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you, Raquel.  Okay.  When we talk about survey we cannot just keep talking about it, sorry, don't worry.  

Okay.  Now we can go to the next presenter and after that we will have -- we can have some questions and also from remote participants.  

So now we'll hear from Drew Smith from the wonderful team of Imagining the Internet and Elon University.  And he's going to talk about education of Internet Governance.

>> DREW SMITH:  Good morning, everybody.  I'm Drew Smith.  This is my second time here at the IGF in the global level and it's good to see that youth is growing in panelists here.  I am a journalist from the Imagining the Internet in North Carolina in the United States.  And if you don't know about the Imagining the Internet centre we do conduct research documenting the use of communications technologies and providing a historic record and we also work to eliminate issues in order to serve the greater good the work we do is public, free and open the Imagining the Internet centre that also sponsors work to bring people together to share their visions for the future of the communications and the future of the world and that's why youth involvement in Internet Governance is so important.  The Internet is really our future, it's an essential part of our daily lives and we will continue to be dependent on it I remember an assignment from one of my classes in communications at Elon University we were asked to go without using the Internet for one whole day and it wasn't possible for pretty much the majority of everybody in the class and that was three years ago and we see how much the Internet explodes every year.



So obviously young people are so invested in using the Internet but a lot of young people have very little knowledge especially most of the people I interact with at the university level of how the Internet is governed.  

And I feel quite fortunate to be among the almost 2 billion people who are connected online.  And I can only imagine how difficult it might be for those who have no access so young people need to be at the table and play a role in Internet Governance discussions they must be included in efforts to enhance co-operation between the global leaders who are making decisions about Internet evolution so we can continue to work to connect more people and to ensure that all have fair, open opportunities online.  

I think the biggest factor interfering with more youth participation is simply ignorance many young people are using the Internet or creating on the Web but there aren't many places in the world where we are encouraged and probably against our natural tendency is to care about Internet Governance the concepts we discuss here at IGF are over most young people's heads that I know I don't know how that is across the world but on average the people that I encounter don't know anything really about Internet Governance.  

And you know terms like net neutrality and the principles aren't normally taught in schools especially in the United States.  Again I don't know much about the rest of the world.  But from where I come from in the United States, it's not taught there would be a few people at the Internet Governance Forum if not for DiploFoundation, the Internet Society both of these organisations are setting the standard for educating young people and giving them opportunities to participate.  

Additional global businesses, governments, NGOs, they should have such programmes to foster youth participation and I challenge those governments, businesses and NGOs so involve more young people.  

We also need to encourage leaders of the world's universities and secondary schools to offer courses that educate young people not only about Internet culture but Internet Governance.  Internet politics, Internet rights.  These are courses we don't see in a lot of US universities.  

Many US universities don't over any of these undergraduate courses about the governance and politics of the Internet there are a lot of culture of Internet classes but there are none that we know that also house the type of centre that we have at Elon University so Imagining the Internet is unique in this way in the United States and I would like to highlight the positive youth participation at Elon University and our efforts to build the capacity globally for our faculty and staff since 2003 this centre has had more than 100 undergraduates at Elon University participate in the documentary research conducted by Imagining the Internet we also presented research such as the IGF Egypt video survey at national conferences on undergraduate research and other research venues a great example of youth participation took place the IGF USA Regional Conference last year and this year.

Students from my university participated in the regular panels and plenary sessions there.  

The planners of that conference decided to be sure that youth were involved in the same way that businesses, Government, Civil Society other stakeholder groups were presented IGF pushed young people to get involved in the Internet Governance process.  Now those young people are informed about those issues and they are playing a part in the discussions about what the future of the Internet will be.  And we also did the Global IGF last year and this year and the other Global IGFs we have gathering perspectives from a variety of other countries and backgrounds so this youth-driven research yielded valuable information about people's desire for the continuation of the Global IGF and the open discussions held here.  

We found all sorts of things like great fears of respondents.  People thought the industrial institutions and governments might exert control that divide and conquer the Internet stifling accessibility on sharing creativity and innovation online the majority of the people we also interviewed told us about how their hope for the future of the Internet in one word is mostly about open and openness.  And they are hopeful about the future of the Internet so this research that young people participated in and gathered is valuable to inform the greater public about what happens here at these meetings and inform the youth of the world what is next for the Internet.  

Our student researchers are here again, myself and a few of the others may have interviewed you already but we are gathering research again to try to inform young people and inform everyone really about what's next for the Internet.  

But I will close by saying the need to educate young people is really in the US and around the world.  The creation of courses and universities is a great way to do this courses in universities that way the young people's tomorrows are impacted by the decisions we make today will have an educated voice other organisations can follow the lead of the DiploFoundation and the Information Society as well in educating young people building capacity and bringing important perspectives from youth to discussions that are shaping our tomorrows.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you, Drew, for your presentation.  

(Applause).

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Okay.  So if we have a question to our panelist -- and also I think we have some questions from remote participants.  So maybe we can start with the remote participants.  

>> One of our remote participants from France is asking a question about Creative Commons and intellectual property issues and he says the creative industry needs to find a new business model and whilst that happens that also needs to change at the same pace.  What do you recommend in that respect.

>> DREW SMITH:  That's pretty much exactly what should happen.  If I said as a simple solution as making non-commercial file sharing legal, that will take time but what is needed right now is actually indeed that the media industry, which previously has been responsible for these services of copying and distributing actually make it so that there's no need for simple Internet privacy for making certain services.

>> TIM DAVIES:  I think it's a question of emphasis in the debate.  So in the UK the bill on digital economy act was washed up by Parliament rapidly prioritizing the corporate with media ownership rather than privatizing rates to creativity rights to a common media and I think if we can balance the debate towards the right to creativity the right to remix and reuse media rather than having the lobbying power of corporate media interests always that which influences Parliament ear decisions and copyright decisions most will be in a positive place so it's not from young people a demand that we change their instantly but it is a recognition that the laws that have been made up until now have not been made in the interest of common people but have been prioritizing the interests of large corporate commercial media owners.

>> RAQUEL GATTO:  So if I may build on your comments we have an example in Brazil in the music industry, in the north of Brazil there was a group that started putting on Creative Commons their content and it was pretty interesting because they build a new model, a new market model.  Their money, their profits come from the shows and from selling stuff, T shirts and so on.  But none of their musics are critiqued none of their musics are paid.  So it's pretty interesting.  And now we are having a discussion to modify our corporate law.  And that's pretty much what we were saying, you move on to get legal change and -- it comes from the bottom up.  Experience from this model market.

>> DREW SMITH:  I suppose they do get some money at least as opposed to them being completely left selling their music off.

>> RAQUEL GATTO:  You don't need to think that if you put your music for free or on Creative Commons you're not earning anything or -- exactly.  

>> The second remote intervention is from the Kenyan hub.  And he says -- or they say:  Although we talk about IP issues, your average person in Kenya does not know anything about copyright.  And here is her idea in the countries in Kenya can someone else in a different country copyright the idea maybe under a different name, et cetera.  

So national capacity building in that respect are very important issues.  

If anyone would like to comment on that from the floor or the panel.  

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  I'm in agreement, fantastic.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK:  Maybe because I'm the one from the dividing country yeah there is a misunderstanding of intellectual property.  Copyright is more Anglo-Saxon perspective but yeah there's a real misunderstanding.  Many people are infringing intellectual property that I suggest they don't know they share content.  Okay.  

>> NADINE KARBACH:  Thank you.  Hi.  This is Nadine from the European Youth Forum and thinking in terms of -- in terms of business models maybe for this copyright field.  I also like -- I was excited when I hurt about this flutter technology and maybe this is also working for music like it's working in Germany and I saw that many online like blogs have this flutter button and everything and they make like -- it's not the amount of money you make from it.  But it's maybe a start.  And it's a bright and brave idea.  Thanks.  That's for a constructive suggestion into this discussion of copyright issues.  Thank you.  

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  Actually the biggest companies are making thousands already.  

>> ALUN MICHAEL:  Thank you very much, Alun Michael, a member of Parliament from the UK.  Last year the rubric foundation in NADA made a very positive contribution jointly with youth net in a workshop which in my mind was the best element of last year's IGF with no exceptions.  

Can I ask whether you would agree with me something that we asked for last year that hasn't happened this year which is we should allow young people to take over the main stage at some point during the event.  Somehow that got edited out of the recommendations in the final plenary session.  And my colleague, Andrew Miller who made the point on behalf of the IGF delegation is kind of grumpy about that fact.  The second point is coming from your presentation.  I was struck by what you described which effectively is peer led training of young people.  It's a very powerful model.  Of course it's a model that's worked well in the free world or the offline world it's the -- it's on which the scaffold was founded although it's sometimes lost track young people leading young people to be trusted to provide that leadership I was wondering if there was a scope for that network that you described which quite rightly is priority of working with young people in terms of both use of the Internet and safety and all of the rest of it to expand and particularly to have older people to go online.



There is an issue about access for older people.  There's a need for a solution.  Is that network of young trainers perhaps the answer to the other end of the a age spectrum, as well?  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you very much for your comment regarding first comment I totally agree that we should just allow people -- allow young people to take the chance and represent themselves.  And be on the stage.  For this specific IGF we have -- we planned to get two members with us here to speak in the sessions.  But due to unexpected circumstances, I believe they are watching us now.  Ahmed Rashad participated yesterday already in the session organised by the Cyber Peace Initiative.  So the participation is granted since we have like a very effective system of remote participation so that is granted and I totally agree.  And youth should just come on the stage and express themselves freely.  I totally agree.  

Regarding the extended network of young volunteers in Egypt and how they can play like a significant role in educating others even the older generation, I did not give you like a full picture of the initiative.  But since you were -- you are aware of what happened last year, we have another group of parents in Egypt, young -- a network of parents volunteers.  And actually at the beginning youth were like the main engine.  We gave them like the training materials.  And the first initial training it was conducted by youth.  

So we contributed somehow to the ICT education somehow, to the young -- to the older generation.  In other sessions in universities our age group the network age group that is from 18 to 25.  

Now they are addressing audience from 18 to over 40 years old.  

So yes, I guess we believe that young people are the digital natives.  They are the most -- they are experts in using technology.  So they should be given the chance to educate others.  

We believe in that.  And we are doing that on the practical mode.  And many of the experts that we asked for their contribution at the beginning of the initiation of these initiatives, the Cyber Peace Initiative knows very well that what we are doing now and that we are doing that on like a regular basis.  And now the awareness sessions in Egypt are taking place from not only the youth network not only the parents, but also we created a network for educators to complete the whole picture.  Thank you.  

>> MARTINA HOGBERG:  Hello, my name is Martina Hogberg from Sweden with the Swedish Media Council and also from the INSAFE Network.  Back to the copyright question.  I would also like to make a comment that I also think it's problematic that a lot of people actually in Sweden I think it's a majority of the citizens who are made criminals with the laws.  And it's also in the politics we have the pirate party who has been very successful in Sweden bringing up these kind of questions.  And I don't know.  I don't have a solution to these kinds of copyright legislation issues.  But I would like to just make a comment that in Sweden we have this good service called Spotify that is a good alternative to listen to music legally.  It's almost all kinds of music.  All kinds of -- I think almost all artists and all music and they get the money in the end.

I mean they get some kind of -- it's a symbolic sum I guess.  But it's a legal way to listen to music.  And we also have an initiative with film doing the same thing called Voddler.  I don't know exactly how it works.  But that's a good way of a solution until we have solved this making a new kind of law for sharing films.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  We will have the last question and after we will move to presenters.

>> Okay.  Any last comments?  

>> AUDIENCE:  Yeah, okay.  Thank you, moderator.  I'm from the South American member of Parliament.  Just relating to the lady from Brazil -- the presenter from Brazil spoke about that many young people access to computers but one of the effects that they are not accessing Internet is parental control.  

Just wanted to find out what do you do about it?  Do we have programmes related to engage the parents so they can then ease on that particular issue.  Like in Egypt I think you said you got involved in training them.  So sort of they can know what is inside the net.  And in that way once they are conscious and they are aware do they feel that they will then be able to deal with them?  And I think I was addressing a meeting in South Africa of a similar nature where we need -- we need something called eParenting.  While parents are conscious we can then develop something called eParenting that can discuss issues of safety and so forth and so forth but allow for the access in the Internet you know for the young kids really to grow up in that environment.  If you could just share with us what you are doing in Brazil.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  So I think we can have the last question.  And then the panelists can answer.  And we have to move -- we have still three presenters and maybe we can have more -- 15 minutes after the time.  So if people can stay here.

>> MALTE SPITZ:  Yeah.  Hi, my name is Malte Spitz.  I'm from the German Green Party and I wanted to talk about the whole copyright issue.  Because I think that there is a really big problem coming up when we are talking mostly on the international level you are talking about the better enforcement of copyright.  And at the same time we talk about creativity and innovation.  And I think that there will be a really big problem because young people today are mostly creative in a digital spectrum.  And when forbidding them like using creative content for remixing and all that stuff, we really get the problem that this generation and the following generations will stop themselves to work and think creative.  Because they always have to bear in mind like these legal aspects and enforcement aspects.  And therefore it should be also in a big interest to have a pretty liberal intellectual property rights law so that even the upcoming generations still can work and think creative in the Internet.   

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.

>> RAQUEL GATTO:  Thank you for your question.  Sorry, I didn't get your name about the eParent control.  But it's a good question.  And it's a pleasure to reply.  

So I can highlight two points that we could work on that.  First in Brazil we have some -- it's called the Public Access Centres, which are kind of cyber cafes.  But organised by the Government.  And they usually have training for all kind of people and especially the parents.  

But a more focused programme what we have when we are talking about the developing country, as I said, we don't have all I think the majority are not well educated.  They don't know how to read or how to -- most of them can sign their names for example.  And they do not know -- they do not assimilate the content.  

So it's pretty difficult to even start access to Internet and to the content.  

But there is a programme.  It's a very interesting one.  They are bringing to television and especially for -- they are very popular in Brazil.  And they are bringing to the scenario problems with the actors for example with cyber bullying.  When you have a teenager scenario or pictured during a soap opera about pedophilia problems and crimes.  And they are getting this kind of access to adults in Brazil because you don't need to know how to use the computer but you can follow your kid.  That's one of the dangerous perspectives with this project.  So I'll reply if anyone wants any more further comments.

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  I would like to comment a little bit on the service question because that's an important thing that's a very important thing and first I would like to blow your mind on Spotify because there are many people who are already boycotting Spotify.  A huge lot of their shares is actually one by the old media core tell LAW and things like that and we have other service for grooveshark.com.  It works on the same principles it has a banner on the side and that's it and it's even easier to spread the links to music files like that with that service.  And yes, that is great.  It's just that Spotify like many other services, they haven't come from the parties, the institutions which already have the money and the power and the interesting thing it comes from single  entrepreneurs which have the courage to try something new.  

And that's great.  I tried out Spotify approximately for one minute and I bought a full-year subscription and having a second one going right now together with groove shark and after that there was no need to look for single music files on the Internet any more.  That's how the development should go.  Definitely.  That's what happens everyone.  Of course I am now afraid that all of this hassle about Spotify will eventually kill it.  And there are many people who are not used to that sort of marketing model.  They are using to selling physical CDs not streaming music.  It's not the same thing.  I know many bands and artists, musicians, music makers who have pulled their music off Spotify because they didn't get the same compensation as selling CDs and that's ridiculous that's only taking content -- taking content away from people who want to use it and that makes Spotify who want to use it I know many people who stopped using this because their favorite band took their music off because they feel they didn't get enough compensation and this sort of models they need support now we can't afford like just trying them out you know like two years and letting them flop.

We need to have a lot of them.  But that is the way.  We need that's the services because people are not going for the cheapest solution.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Sorry, Joonas.

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  People are going for the cheapest solution they are lazy and willing to pay for the good service the easiest way and that's the way it should go.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  So now we can go to the eGovernance operator and youth participation part and we will start with the Tim Davies maybe he can introduce himself.

>> TIM DAVIES:  Yeah.  I'm Tim Davies.  I'm from England.  And I run a small business working on youth engagement and participates and supporting organisations to look at online open data look at youth engagement look at civic engagement using the Web.  

I did have another presentation prepared but instead I thought I would share something very briefly to frame some of this debate so three or four slides that just frame this one is understanding the term youth which we use to catch many different groups.  And I think it's worth remembering that youth consists of children, young people and young adult and I think it's a challenge to those of us sitting here that we maybe fall more into the older young person young adults group than necessary the children or young people and as we talk about youth in Internet Governance processes we need to think about all of those groups being represented and being able to be represented not with one single voice but with a diversity of voices, a diversity of interests from many cultures and backgrounds.  So one thing I don't -- I hope not to hear too much at future IGFs is the voice of youth as a single thing but that we understand children young people young adults need different approaches to make sure they are represented and heard.



And the other slide that I think is absolutely key is this:  This is taken from the UN Convention on the rights of the child and applies to all under 18s in all but two countries and this sets out three sorts of rights it sets out rights to protection, rights to provision and rights to participation and when we talk about moving beyond child safety it's because that focus we have in IGF so often when we talk about young people is a focus solely on protection rights and not only on the solely on the protection rights but solely on strategies based on restriction protection.  So the rights -- the provision we have already heard about, the provision is part of a solution to the challenges we face if we provide services that allow legal access to content people will use those so often we respond though by putting up barriers at each level we need to think when we look at the protection of young people not only how do we put in place barriers and safety how do we get young people participating actively in their own protection.

And how do we provide services for young people so I had a very interesting conversation with Richard Allen on Facebook yesterday where we talked about the 13 age limit on services like Facebook set because of the data protection law not set because of safety set because we had that debate about actually young people want opportunities to use spaces for creativity, communication, political expression we need to focus on provision and on participation and on all of those.  And the reason I came to focus on children's rights was actually some founding values which are equality, democracy, and working for better decision making.  So I won't give my main presentation I'll just show you in a moment where you can find the content from that but I think it would be really positive if in debates in future on young people we actually can say at the end of any discussion we have had all of these elements in we have had solutions that focus on participation and solutions that focus on positive provision as well as things that focus on safety and that's how we get beyond it not just by having sessions on other issues but by going beyond it in the safety sessions, too, to see the bigger picture that's there.

I'll try to bring this up because I know in this talk it's hard to get the ideas up so I'll post those on the screen that will be up here shortly and if you want to explore the issues of Government there's a political innovation project running in the UK and Evan essay there looking at interactive Government and pulling together some of the learning on practical things we've been doing with groups of young people with young adults working with young people and with people from across the age spectrum looking at how do we make Government capable to work in the interpret age with some real practical stuff there so that address at the bottom will get you to the essay and there's also an open programme around that that we invite anyone to get involved in.  Thank you.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you really quick.  Now we have the next speaker.  So our next speaker is Tommi Kartaavi.  From Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities and also from ISOC Finland.  I think he will present some information for youth involvement in democratic process.  

>> TOMMI KARTAAVI:  Okay, thanks, Rafik.  I'm going to be talking about how to get young people involved in politics and why.  

And I'm going to be talking about the why part first.  

Let me start by quoting Winston Churchill who once said something to the effect that the democracy is the worst form of Government except for all of the others that have been tried.  And I think it's safe to say that the form of Government we call democracy is by no means perfect.  

However, it seems to be working.  And the alternatives as Churchill pointed out are far worse.  

If you -- if it ain't broke, don't fix it is another way of putting it.  

That being said what we mean by democracy is not set in stone.  It keeps changing with the changes in the society.  

The thing that has perhaps had the biggest impact on the society in the last -- within the last 15 years is the Internet.  So how has the Internet changed the way democracies work now?  Not much.  

The potential of the Internet is still largely unharnessed in this field.  A so-called eDemocracy and eGovernment are just taking their first clumsy baby steps.  And I think that as long as the people in power are people like me who didn't grow up with this technology, the progress will be relatively slow.  

However, when the Web savvy people, the young people, generation growing now, the so-called net natives replace the current generation as decision makers.  That's when we may start to see some changes the question is are we ready for that will the scale and paces for the change be too much for the delicate political system?  Kids growing up right now will no doubt teach us new ways to use the power of the Internet in politics.  Ways that we cannot even imagine right now.  

With a we have to do is to make sure that they have the basic understanding of the nuts and bolts of the democratic process so that they will not do damage by fixing things that ain't broke.  

The best way to educate is by including the young people in decision making processes showing them that they can make a difference and at the same time teaching the basic principles of democracy.  This of course is easier said than done.  When I was a teenager way back in the last millennium it was not cool to be interested in politics and current affairs it was considered quite weird and nerdy and I don't think that has changed very much.  So how to get young people involved.  The answer is obviously online.  Educational material in the form of web pages, videos or interactive games is a good start but not enough.  

Young people must be shown that their opinion counts and that they can make a difference.  Cities and municipalities, especially should take responsibility and provide ways for meaningful interaction and this must go beyond some feedback forms on the Web pages or setting up Facebook pages.  I have some slides that are being used in Finland currently for these purposes.  

Let's see the first one this is called last in Parliament or children's Parliament.  It's meant for school-aged children between 9 and 13 years.  

And it's funded by a foundation.  So it's not by the Public Administration itself.  

It has boards and committees and they meet online in chat rooms and they have a virtual Parliament building.  

Then there's the youth Parliament Finland.  And this page is provided by the Parliament of Finland and it provides education and information for people who are about to be of voting age.  

And features is a game called Lawmakers that shows how the Parliament works and how laws are made.  

This is a screen shot of the game.  Unfortunately in Finnish only.  

Okay.  This site is called Influencing Skills.  And it's a web site dedicated to educating young people of various ways to make an impact on society.  And it deals with the media democracy and yes lobbying.  And it's supported by the Ministry of Education and culture.  

And last but not least, we have this initiative channel.  And this is perhaps the most promising of the lot.  Because it's meant for young people to make municipal initiatives taking -- they can for example go online and say we need a new skate ramp or we need parking space for motor cycles or mopeds in the school's parking lots.  And others can comment on it and they can support it and it has some follow-up features that shows what action the municipality took on the initiative.  The downside is it's not used very much.  And I think it's the same problem with all of these Web sites.  Young people don't find them.  Or they are not interested.  Or whatever.  But these are some first steps at trying to get them involved.  And it's a huge task.  And ideas are needed for the future.  Thank you.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you, Tommi.  Thank you, Tommi.  It's really interesting to see what is going on in Finland.  I think Finland is one of the countries which there's real involvement of all of the multistakeholders on Internet Governance and I hope that many countries follow their examples.  

Now we will have the presentation from Rafid Fatani who is from Saudi Arabia, he's an researcher he was in the IGF Secretariat last year and now he's in the UGF Secretariat.

>> RAFID FATANI:  I would like to make this brief I'm a person that change can happen with dialogue and that can only go two ways and me sitting here talking about my ideas and what I think is not really talking and I certainly don't want to go over some of the generic issues that have been gone on and on year after year.  

But I just wanted to briefly talk about best practice and passing on different models that different countries and different regions have used across -- we've heard this issue over and over in different pans and sessions but I wanted to highlight one small issue with that.  It's definitely a very good model to use.  However, sometimes it's important to know that transferring knowledge, it's never a one solution fits all.  

For example, when we talk about Digital Divide, I'll give you a very short example.  The interpret in Saudi Arabia was introduced in 1994.  Saudi Arabia last year was one of the top investors in ICT.  It spent around 20 billion US dollars in ICT infrastructure which is a huge figure.  

Yet we have 77% of the population without access to the Internet.  

So in correlation, you see the link.  And then only 2% of the population with broadband access.  

And then in looking at that specific problem where this country has a lot of money and a lot of investment within that industry, yet the output is very different than what you would find in a country without such a big financial investment and a huge output.  

So looking at solutions in dealing with these things are very much -- very different and very much cultural, social and political struggles that need to be tackled on that individual level.  

I've recently been involved with ChildNet International.  They are based in the UK.  And they were kind enough to invite me to go to their Youth Com and highlight some of the issues for some of their young delegates and come and bring up some of the issues.  And again when looking at best practices and looking at different solutions, I remember one of the young panelists from the UK was talking about -- again about access and broadband connections and although the UK is having a lot of different issues, access and broadband issues are not one of those things that they are ahead of.  

I recall a few of the participants saying:  I love in a rural area.  And I find it extremely difficult to download or watch movies on YouTube.  Which you would think is something that's a given at that point.  

Another issue of intellectual property.  I just want to give a very short story about my sister.  My sister is 12 years old.  And she was telling me that her father was a very strict Muslim and he wouldn't allow her to access foreign media, shall I say.  Hollywood films.  Popular culture music, et cetera.  

And the way she went around it -- and she said to me:  But it's okay.  Because we use peer to peer.  And I find it quite shocking because she was -- I always see them year after year and for a 12-year-old to come and tell me this I was a bit taken aback and I said maybe some of these things are illegal do you know some of the issues around that and she said but it's the only way we can watch these things so again it's flagging up some of these problems that although in one country, in one context in one political manner it's okay, it's acceptable, we must reflect on how this affects the rest of the world and all of the other issues that surround that.  

I just wanted to make a brief intervention regarding a question from the floor asking how the youth find the solution for some of the IP issues that were raised.  Again it really just links back to this it's never a one solution fits all each country each demographic and each stakeholder needs a specific solution looking at different business models might be one way in one country and not in another country in Brazil I know they are looking at changing the law and looking at setting a small tariff to pay for some of the movies.  It might be as long as three years which is not a lot because your average Brazilian capital afford to go out and buy a blockbuster hit DVD so if we want the rest of the world to contribute import and export, then we have to find new solutions to those specific regions.  

So that's what I have to kind of contribute to this conversation.  Thank you.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thanks, Rafik.  We have a last and late presenter from -- who can represent Asia.  She is Bianca Ho from NetMission.  

>> BIANCA HO:  Hi, I'm really sorry that I attended late because I was the Asia-Pacific Regional IGF and I think one of the things -- I was on the Secretariat so I actually helped them with a lot of the logistics talking to oversea delegates and actually having youth be participating directly at the IGF Secretariat level at the local organising committee level.  So I think having a youth to participate in a lot of these IGF events is really helpful.  It really helped me understand the -- who are the stakeholders, why is it relevant to participate in their conversation.  

And another thing I think that I should bring is the Youth Dynamic Coalition who are formed by a lot of key members who are here you see a lot of them on the panel, another thing is that youth do bring a new perspective when approaching Internet Governance because I guess a lot of people here are already experts in their fields and they do represent a very strong -- they do have so much knowledge that they pretend to sometimes they are just focusing in their arena but you sometimes -- youth sometimes can step back and look at the big picture as the Internet Governance as they are beginners and they do suggest really good ideas such as I think we put together a statement today at the main session to talk about you know why youth should be participating in Internet Governance the conversation.  And also we think of having all these initiatives that currently is available on the Internet.

And because we don't probably know what's going on in the other part of the world that we are doing duplicated efforts that people have already done.  

So by consolidating it, we kind of had the YCRG.org we have a list of the initiatives that are currently done for like youth for example we had ChildNet for the UK.  We organised any YGF and there's also one going on in Denmark and we possibly bring towards reaching -- having all of these resources combined together and actually you know kind of use the best practice kind of type of thinking.  How to improve the forums.  And I think this is definitely a valuable part that youth can contribute to the Internet Governance discussion and also in bringing in new ideas.  So -- yeah.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  So I think now we have time for questions.  

>> ALUN MICHAEL:  I was very interested -- sorry.  Alun Michael, member of Parliament for the UK I was very interested in what was being said about Finland and the attempt to engage young people with politics.  But can I be a bit challenging because I thought it was a very conservative approach that was being offered.  What you were talking about was talking to young people generally about the process.  And that's arid.  It's not real.  It seemed to me that the idea of the municipal initiative had something to offer.  But again, that seems to be young people making a proposal rather than taking responsibility.  I've recently had a look at the system in London where they have a young Mayor and two deputies and they are actually given a budget and they have to consult with young people in the burrow about how that budget is used.  That's real.

That's taking responsibility.  

And the traditional way that we have approached it having you know imitation elections in school, very often equally arid they just find the most popular person rather than about policies and they are not going to change anything.  

And I found going into schools as I've done quite a lot in the last few years since I stopped being a minister in my constituency that young people are generally very constructive and very intelligent about the issues that they have explored through public affairs, debates and discussions.  They are informing each other they are informing themselves they are searching out information.  

So wouldn't it be better if we change the system completely and made it real for young people?  I've come around to the idea of reducing the voting age to 14 which would mean that all young people would then have their first opportunity for voting for real not in a sort of play situation while they are still in full-time education.  

So aren't we being rather too conservative?  Perhaps it's the old age of the panelists and something like that that is making us too conservative in our thinking.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  

>> ROLAND PERRY:  Hi, good morning.  I'm Roland Perry from Costa Rica.  And the vice Minister of science and technology.  I just want to share one experience we have in Costa Rica I'm a political scientist and I was working with a researcher ten years ago on political cultures, tariffs, in terms of young people.  And how to -- how to increase the participation levels.  And in these population and segment or cluster.  So we found that the traditional political participation issues are not the most important for the young people.  And we found that we need to include some specific issues that increase the political participation of the young like -- of the young people like the gender agenda, the environment, the inequity or social issues.  

We found that the young people are participating in different kinds of organisations of social organisations.  Different than political parties.  Like for example sports or environment organisations.  Volunteer organisations.  And we are now working on a programme of increasing the political participation with digital media including these issues and it's very interesting how it is really increasing.  It's like to find the issues, they need the discussion.  They like to take opinions.  And how to digitalize the discretion and to use the digital media as a way to increase the political participation.  

I just wanted to share with you also an initiative that we are launching on October in three weeks in Mexico.  In the Plenipotentiary Meeting of the ITU.  And our President Laura Chinchilla, our first woman in history as our President we will be launching an initiative by the Child Online Protection Global Initiative so I just wanted to share this experience with you.  Thank you.  

>> YASMEEN ARIFF:  Hi.  My name is Yasmeen Ariff from the Commonwealth IGF.  I would like to thank the panelist and all of the input from everyone it's really sort of blown my mind in terms of what there is and we at the Commonwealth IGF are looking at youth contribution to development of policy as one of our priorities for the coming year and my big question is where do I start from?  

So as a first step I would really like to invite all of you with a view to drop us a line on our web site.  Just give us -- start giving us some input so we can sort of sort through.  And I would love to speak to -- most of the panelists on a one-on-one basis but thank you very much.  I would like to sort of because we have the geographic spread, the socioeconomic spread, it's a big task.  And I would really like your input in terms of where should we focus, what should our first step be.  

So any inputs on that would be really welcome.  

>> AUDIENCE:  I'm from Thailand.  I would like to say thank you for the panelists, as well for like bringing the very interesting issue.  And points of view from the youth.  And I think it's quite clear that the youth is the majority of the next citizenship on the Internet.  

So I'm -- I would like to see like youth has to be the rights and authorized to like go on the Internet instead of try to be engaged and have the voice of youth but actually youth should have a right to do the governing to the Internet because the people -- they are the people that were born -- they are like the digital native so they know many things than the people at like the age of 40s or something like that.  

So I would like to see kind of like -- probably it can be at the centre stage of the youth can be set for the -- for governing the Internet.  So I think it should be in that way and kind of being like the broader perspective from like the youth from around the world.  I think that should be offered.

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  Okay last question can.

>> JOONAS MAKINEN:  Just quick response on Jasmine's point about where to start I think one key thing is the Internet and governance isn't just being discussed by young people in this form the commonwealth Youth Forum in their statement from the heads of Government meeting in Trinidad had a really clear statement and they are passionate for all young people UK Parliament is discussed at other Parliaments.  One of the key challenges for all of us is to go out to those faces as well as to bring those people in here because those discussions are going on.

>> BENSON NCUBE:  Thank you.  My name is Benson.  I'm from Botswana.  I'm speaking on my personal capacity.  But it is my observation that we are sitting at the global forum.  But it is apparent that there is some sectors of the world that are not represented even not at youth level but at the adult level.  If I look at the IGFs, there's some regions that they don't have Regional IGFs and I wonder how if the adults are not included at this level we should be taking this message to the youth as leaders.  How are we going to achieve the digital conclusion.  Thank you.  

>> PANELIST:  Can I just make a comment on that?  I think the IGF Secretariat have made a very good decision to include remote participation and encourage it and the amount of hubs now we have around the region around the world globally is substantial and we have had great responses.  Today I was a remote moderator and we had interventions from Kenya we had interventions from France we had interventions -- we have had in the discussions here from Chennai, the UK.  So it's -- and I know there's hubs everywhere from specific islands to North America.  So there is ways for people to get involved.  There is -- if there is a will, there's a way and it's not expensive given that you have Internet connection to get on and have your voice heard.  That's possibly one encouraging thing.  

>> BIANCA HO:  I think I can add onto that point because I was the organiser of the Youth IGF camp in Hong Kong and actually that didn't happen parallelly so dot Asia organised NetMission and NetMission just self initiated and said okay we actually want more inclusive dialogue with the youth because this is simply not how youth probably discuss in discussions we don't go to a room for two hours and sit there for a long time to talk about the issues that we care about.  We kind of have a more collaborative way of working towards our goals.  

So actually that happened in two different spaces like it didn't happen parallelly.  They just constantly gave us a lot of support so I think youth can use innovative ways to collaborate on the Internet without actually meeting like in a physical space like this.  And again, they are adding to the remote participation point.  

I think this panel a lot of the panel here right now are in the youth coalition and they did a really good job in using a power pad and just pulling out all of the information what they care about and discuss those issues in two days and they are able to come up with the statement that's very substantial.  Substantial meaning to the youth.  And I think those are different ways youth can collaborate on the Internet without having a Regional IGF.  And -- but then of course I think having Regional IGF definitely helps the youth because you are -- we are actually having a panel on the Regional IGF and having those voices heard but I think there are a lot of innovative tools on the Internet currently that allow youth to collaborate and similar interests to collaborate and I think that's one of the most important things of Internet is that you don't have to be constrained by the physical space.   

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you, Bianca.  Any questions?  Okay.  I just want -- last one.

>> TIM DAVIES:  I just wanted to say I mentioned the Youth IGF and ChildNet International.  I've got with me here some small posters which has some of the statements I believe of some of the young people some of the issues they flagged up when they went to the UK Youth IGF forum in London it was a three-day event that was held in the national science multimedia at Google and IFP so if you're interested in finding out truly what some of these young people from a diverse range of demographies I would encourage you to pick one up before you leave.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK:  I would like briefly to go back to the gentleman from Kenya.  Speaking about the eParenting.  Just a quick comment.  Parents in Egypt need like resource to come back and be educated about the Internet safety and how to use the Internet.  Basic ICT skills.  So we launched a portal that comprises like participation from youth, children, educators, prosecutors and many others.  So I'm inviting you to take a look and we have here our friend and partner Marsali who might want to elaborate on that.  

>> MARSALI HANCOCK:  Thank you.  We have some partnerships in being able to develop content that is then localized so things we are creating together around Facebook for parents what is Facebook kind of from the lens of helping children to be able to ramp in and have positive optimistic experiences and better navigate when something goes wrong so we work together to create content that they localize and put into their own language and they customize to fit the local community and we are happy to do that in many countries.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  I think that we can finish --

>> AUDIENCE:  It's about lowering of the voting age of kids.  I'm not sure I agree.  I mean young people are still young people.  And if you have a pop star to get run for Parliament, I think the majority of them would go for that.  However --

>> PANELIST:  I don't entirely utterly disagree with that.  I think we need to say young people are capable and able to make decisions from a very young age and we should be respecting that we need political education for all people young people and adults alike and absolutely looking at voting and looking at that is key.

>> AUDIENCE:  Yeah.  All right.  I was still going to say that I was talking about the national level.  The local level, however, it's a different story and I think that would be a good entry point for the younger people to enter into the political game.  And for one reason that the pop stars are not so interested in going to the municipal councils.  

>> RAFIK DAMMAK: Thank you.  I think that we have many things to talk about and to follow up after the workshop.  It's just the beginning of a longer debate.  And I hope, also, that many of you that can join our Youth Coalition on Internet Governance which organised this workshop with the partners like the Electronic Frontier Finland and Imagining the Internet and Elon University and also the DiploFoundation.  I want to thank all of our panelists.  We wanted to have more gender diversity.  But for some reason they cannot come to the IGF.  I'm really sorry for that.  And even we have panelists who gets it so we have some issues that can happen at the last moment.  Anyway, thank you for everybody that -- who attended late this workshop and I hope we can continue the discussion later.  Thank you.  

(Applause)



(Session ended at 1119)