“Can we in fact proceed or accept the outcome of any MS [multistakeholder governance] process without a very close re-examination and structuring of those processes; that is, to develop a means for providing appropriate safeguards against contamination, subversion, distortion or interest capture by or on behalf of one or another of the significant players whose interests in Internet development may be quite the opposite of the open, inclusive, transparent Internet that is the evident goal for most of those particularly from Civil Society who espouse MSism so passionately?”
The Internet Society, one of the active players in the debate on Internet governance, says this:
Each year, the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) provides all stakeholders a unique opportunity to discuss openly critical emerging Internet-related issues.
This year’s overarching IGF theme is: “Building Bridges” – Enhancing Multistakeholder Cooperation for Growth and Sustainable Development”
As part of its engagement at the IGF, the Internet Society strongly supports the fundamentals of the open and sustainable Internet:
-Open Global standards for unleashed innovation;
-Open to Everyone: a freedom-enhancer for every Internet user;
-Open for Business and Economic progress;
-Open and Multistakeholder governance for transparent inclusion.
That sounds so very nice, vague, and naive (or maybe disingenuous). The bottom line: regardless of internet governance institutions, structures, or players we need to identify bad actors and deal with them appropriately.
Wikipedia says of multistakeholder governance:
“Multistakeholderism is a framework and means of engagement, it is not a means of legitimization. Legitimization comes from people, from work with and among people.”
One thing that comes to mind is “profiling” the way the FBI profiles serial killers on TV, that is, looking for behavior patterns that correlate with other bad actors in the past.
However we do it, we need definitions and tests of good faith and bad faith with some kind of empirical metrics.
BTW I think the US government fails all conceivable tests of good faith and should be put in the penalty box indefinitely.
- The Internet, Global Governance, and the Surveillance State in a Post-Snowden World (The Internet is Not Your Friend, Get Over It) (PRA 2.0)
- “Internet Freedom” and Post-Snowden Global Internet Governance (PRA 2.0))
- Snowden isn’t just about Surveillance. It is much, Much, MUCH worse… (pcmcgee.wordpress.com)
- Ominous Developments on the “Internet Governance” Front (volokh.com)
- Internet infrastructure groups move away from US gov’t over spying (NetworkWorld Security) (networkworld.com)