NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 14 Dec 2012 07:49:08 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Hi,

As a advisor on the US delegation, I must add that this is very much to their credit.  They really really wanted to be able to sign the treaty and it is only because they stood on principle about defending the Internet especially from control of content.  They worked hard, harder than I even imagined the government could work to get a treaty they could sign.

As someone who is generally not very supportive of governments I am very impressed by this effort.  

I got to see the sausage made, and I am so glad at least 30 countries, it seems, will avoid it.  But the story is not over and will continue next year in the World Telecommunity Policy Forum (WTPF), where Internet Governance is the subject.

avri

On 14 Dec 2012, at 01:41, Andrew A. Adams wrote:

> The US, Canada and UK have refused to sign an international communications 
> treaty at a conference in Dubai.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20717774
> 
> 
> -- 
> Professor Andrew A Adams                      [log in to unmask]
> Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
> Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
> Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/
> 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2