IGF 2018 Report Template
Pre-Session Synthesis Due: 2 November 2018
Short Report Due: Within 12 hours of when session is held
Long Report Due: 23 November 2018
- Session Type (Workshop, Open Forum, etc.): Interactive Expert Session
- Title: “The Open, Free Internet is for EVERY stakeholder”
- Date & Time: 9:00-10:30, November 12(Day1)
- Organizer(s): Mariko Kobayashi, Hirotaka Nakajima
- Chair/Moderator: Mariko Kobayashi(onsite), Hirotaka Nakajima(online)
- Rapporteur/Notetaker: Mariko Kobayashi
- List of speakers and their institutional affiliations (Indicate male/female/ transgender male/ transgender female/gender variant/prefer not to answer):
-
- Sanja Kelly(F), Freedom House
- Thomas Grob(M), Deutsche Telekom AG
- Lillian Nalwoga(F), ISOC Uganda
- Guy Berger(M), UNESCO
- Olivier Bringer(M), European Commission
- Theme (as listed here): Evolution of Internet Governance
- Subtheme (as listed here): MULTISTAKEHOLDERISM
- Please state no more than three (3) key messages of the discussion. [300-500 words]
• “The Open, Free Internet” encourages the digital economy, the evolution of technology, express and share ideas and accomplishing SDGs.
• Appealing benefits of "The Open, Free Internet" is an effective way to build a “multi-stakeholder” dialogue between policymakers and several stakeholders rather than only criticizing about issues, such as blocking, filtering and Internet Shutdown.
- Please elaborate on the discussion held, specifically on areas of agreement and divergence. [300 words] Examples: There was broad support for the view that…; Many [or some] indicated that…; Some supported XX, while others noted YY…; No agreement…
Many agreed that the Internet is a key platform for business, education, political debate and “The Open, Free Internet” enables the free flow of ideas, freedom of speech, innovation of technology, social progress and other positive impacts.There was broad support for the view that users can have the right to access and distribute information, content application and services of their choice, and there is no possibility for Internet access providers to ban or to discriminate at the level of the network.
An expert from European Commission also support the view above, but in case someone hosts illegal contents, it should be removed quickly by takedown notice and when the content is removed by mistake, government should put in place effective judicial remedies as an expert from Deutsch Telekom introduced Net Neutrality rule in Europe. Some audiences worried about the possibility of censorship and he emphasized that removal of illegal contents does not mean censorship.
Regarding the discussion of how to build a dialogue including various stakeholders, one of audiences asked “how can we reach the Internet technical community?.” Several people from technical communities responded to this, and they indicated that some local community such as regional NIC and ISOC HQ, chapter has issued statement on those issues, and national or regional network operators’ group(NOG) can be contact point, and they know what is the better way.
Many supported the optimistic view about “the Open Internet” which is essential for human right, business, users, and there is huge facilitation of more diversity and hope more development of the Internet platform.
- Please describe any policy recommendations or suggestions regarding the way forward/potential next steps. [200 words]
- Regarding the Internet Shutdown, there is a global campaign of the Internet Society(ISOC) “KeepItOn, ” and we can push more and push our government to keep it on.
- The Internet is an essential platform for citizens, business, education, even for a political dialogue. Therefore, any regulators and governments need to look at the value of International standard, necessity , proportionality, legitimate purpose of “The Open, Free Internet.”
- When we work on the discussion of blocking, filtering, net neutrality and the Internet Shutdown, we should not go as typical government(topdown manner) but we should really involve the multi-stakeholder community and its different constituencies to make sure that address their worries, and we produce better rules or cause of practices. It is really a joint responsibility.
What ideas surfaced in the discussion with respect to how the IGF ecosystem might make progress on this issue? [150 words]
Take the balance between all stakeholders’ demands and governments’ polices is difficult, but it is important to try to put everyone(different stakeholders) around the table as possible, and we believe that IGF can be the place for the dialogue.
- Please estimate the total number of participants.
40
- Please estimate the total number of women and gender-variant individuals present.
3 : 7
- To what extent did the session discuss gender issues, and if to any extent, what was the discussion? [100 words]
- Women speaker actively speak on open mic from both participants and speakers. We have diverse participants from each stakeholder, including several people from governments and one regulator attend our workshop.
-
- Session outputs and other relevant links (URLs):