We must encourage the young people from different background to engage with different multi stakeholder’s communities effectively in order to make their voice heard for the future of Internet Governance in different regions.
We must encourage the young people from different background to engage with different multi stakeholders communities effectively in order to make their voice heard for the future of Internet Governance in different regions .
so sorry the previous comment was fo parargraph no 7.
The three common types of Harassment are: Verbal, visual and physical, can we consider any of three types is crime?
The pandemic has changed the education system dramatically. Currently, over 1.2 billion students are out of the traditional classroom, but still faced some challenges : An influx in the people who take online courses , Increased need for teachers’ advanced training , High demand for improved engagement , Increased need for personalized experiences and Continuous changes due to new trends.
I think if the people (he or she) has a good background to work with any ICT sector they have a right to take a job regardless of his/her situation ,and of course the priority must be for the people with special needs.
I think Trust most of the time linked to the security , It involves the national and international legal structures and systems for providing safety, privacy and integrity of the Internet, as well as protecting the property of Internet users, particularly minors and novice users. This also includes the transparency of dealing with the huge amount of data resulting from Internet usage and the need to have an open data policy.
I think three ways to make technologies more inclusive for people with disability:
Embed inclusivity in 4IR technologies, Apply universal and accessible design in tech-enabled products , Invest in assistive technology with 4IR.
As all know the main goals of Internet governance in different regions is to promote shared human values and rights in the “virtual” world, which should be similar to those of the “real” world , hopefully will reach that goal one day or even close.
What priorities and/or changes are needed from an Internet governance policy standpoint to accelerate progress towards a more inclusive internet for persons with disabilities?
Need some more specific points of concern topic
If we mention Reliable with I. Access, we do not need section 19. Reliable Access means the Internet blocks is already covered in that.
It should be Reliable Access, not just Access.
Cybersecurity contain many sub-themes (i.e. system/infrastructure resilience, safety, privacy, cyber crime, etc) and many actors. It is important to encourage the technical community in those domains to engage with other stakeholders so there is clear understanding of the problems and discussion on possible solutions.
Cyber security is the main biggest issue now a days
must be infrastructure-based
For those of us with access to the Internet, it is a technology that plays an increasingly central role in our daily lives, letting us work, study, and connect with friends and family from around the world.
But the Internet – including infrastructure and devices, applications and services, and the relevant policies and regulations – is in a constant state of flux. Governments and businesses are increasingly making decisions that could impact the Internet. If we fail to recognize, protect, and support what makes the Internet valuable, we risk a series of irreversible and accelerating changes that chip away and ultimately break the foundation underpinning this incredible resource for us all.
That is why as the Internet evolves it is key for all Internet stakeholders to understand any change that can threaten the fundamentals of the Internet. We should be able to tell if a proposal could harm what makes the Internet work for everyone.
Today, the Internet plays an essential role in the majority of societies around the world. From banking to education, health to logistics, just about every sector relies on Internet-based applications and services to function.
Our increased dependence on digital technologies brings with it growing concerns around Internet security. While there are many dimensions to Internet security, securing the key building blocks of the Internet’s infrastructure is critical.
The Internet’s routing system enables data to flow from one point to another. Ensuring that this data flows correctly, and to its intended recipient, is the foundation of Internet security.
Thousands of Internet routing incidents occur every year, leading to economic and social harm by making key services unreachable, disrupting e-commerce, allowing malicious actors to spy on users and with it, the potential to compromise systems.
While existing security measures can help address many of these routing incidents, the solutions they provide are often limited. The interconnected nature of networks means that many solutions only work when other networks make the same improvements. We need collective action to make a real change.
In support of the larger Internet security agenda, policymakers should work with network and infrastructure operators, critical infrastructure protection agencies and standards bodies, among others, to improve global routing security while also preserving vital aspects of the system that have allowed the Internet to be open and universal.
Propose for the last sentence “Strategic public-private partnerships can provide potential solutions to bridge the digital divide in terms of Internet connectivity, provision of devices and skills training.” to be incorporated into or combined with paragraph 9, as connectivity, devices and digital literacy are key elements and equally important in fostering and achieving digital inclusion.
In discussing about the freedom of speech and expression, we must also look into the importance or sort of rights for the users or public-at-large to obtain a correct and reliable information.
We definitely do not want to see the Internet flooded with mischievous and irresponsible speeches or expressions that would not just eliminate trust but also creating an unhealthy environment and ecosystem.
The capitalist economy of world is going into the hands of few rich people and the divide of rich and poor is increasing. In order to meet the sustainable development Goals the policy should reduce the gap between rich and poor citizens.
There should be updated cyber crime legislation in every country but the legislation must be adopted after the consensus from multi-stakeholders independent of law enforcement.
Where Internet has enabled the access to information and on-line social networking the need of Digital Rights Management has emerged as need of community for protecting the social-cultural need and to protect users online privacy and safe data use. And capacity building programs are in high demands.
There is need do the capacity building of elders and parents so as to bridge the gap of Internet access between children and parents.
Emerging technologies must utilize the benefits of community networks for connecting the last miles network for access to affordable Internet.
The inclusion should also shape the technology in a way that is easily acceptable in diverse social culture.
The implementations strategy must also take in account the age factors. The young womens today have more capacity and capability and access to absorb the Internet then mid aged women. So there is need to capacity development of women specific program to educate them about safe use pf technology.
The standard should be prepared for IoT security and protecting users privacy. These standard must be regulated while allowing the IoT in any country this can help in mitigating security concern of IoT adoption .
Many cost effective IoTs device comes with weak set of protocol which rises Security concerns so there is need to regulate the IoT manufactures and policy should be made to implement the compliance standards. only certified and compliance IoT devices should be allowed to allowed to market.
Te cross-boarder security is a challenge due to the fact that a lot of security architecture based on central trusted party to make sure the data integrity and security. The universal technological solution for protecting data integrity independent of trusted central party should also be explored to ensure the goal of cross-boarder data security for better data regulation and security.
The specific capacity building model for smooth learning of old age people should be encouraged. This will help in bridging gap between the understanding of young generation vs the mid or old age people who have less tendency to adopt and learn new technologies.
Network shutdown is still happening in the Asia Pacific and when that’s done , general public is completely ok with the government’s decision thinking it must be for them. The general public isn’t aware of their access rights..so a strong awareness with regard to ones access rights is required in the Asia Pacific and in countries like Bhutan where Sig has not been retained yet.
We 51 protection of child online: importance of child safely complaints tools
1) takes about different child abuses like cyber bullying, emotional abuse, sexting, sexual abuse, sexual exploitations, child
pornography and so on..
2) talked about iwf(internet watch foundation) which allows people all over the world to report online child abuse.
3) talked about what solutions can be provided which mostly stated that awareness is the key and the parents, teachers, government and the operators should come together to tackle the issue..
I would further like to state that cyber security classes should be mandated in all schools by the governments of each nation and more awareness should be made for parents,teachers and also to children on this regard..
Strategy or a solution of including rural areas of developing countries where connectivity is still a big question can be a great step for the accomplishment of the goal.
I believe a point of agreement between governments and private telecommunication companies is essential to connect the unconnected areas. Some fix percentage of connecting unconnected areas will be a good step towards connectivity.
Awareness programs on how irresponsible use of the internet can have a huge negative impact on people’s lives is needed.
people don’t know about the multi-stakeholder approach and they are not aware of how they can play their part to shape the internet. Awareness seminars are needed for this.
Public access not only helps to improve digital literacy and provide access to marginalized and under served communities, it also helps to provide “assisted access” to people who are not internet savvy.
For ensuring Cyber security, Privacy and Safer Internet, it is imperative that there is collaboration and more emphasis on capacity building among decision makers on the implications of their decisions,
A multi stakeholder approach to resolve the issue of universal acceptance is of prime importance. Industry, government, technolologist, academia, civil society, need to come together, discuss and work to resole the issue. It is also very important to take the views of internet users and non users about what they want, since they would be the ones who would use internet in local language in the future.
Shut downs leads to social instability, human insecurity and loss of peoples trust in situations often marked with social and political unrest. It is important to measure the impact of internet shut down and also to analyse what situations trigger internet shutdowns and who is given the iscretionary power to do so. Further what are the extreme situtaions when internet can be shut down and what is the process that will be followed needs to be discussed.
Infact rather than trying to shut the internet Dialogue, transparency and openness to try and find alternate solutions to this difficult issue could be the approach.
The gender digital divide should also highlight in access and the strategies which need to be adopted by nations to connect the women, the marginalised and disable.
This could perhaps be added after the last sentence , The greatest challenge ………………..skills of participants.
Another challenge is in scaling up and sustaining these initiatives.
Apart from promoting digital literacy there is a need to improve gender rights online too. To improve inclusion especially of women and protect their rights online, a study called “Views & Perspectives on Gender Rights Online, For the Global South” (http://www.ccaoi.in/UI/links/fwresearch/Report of Study on the Views and Perspectives on Gender Rights Online for the Global South Final.pdf), suggests implementation of better and effective policies; encouraging ICT skills and Science Technology Engineering and Math (STEM) studies amongst women and encouraging digital literacy; policy reforms for ensuring gender inclusive access to the internet; building trust online, including better legislation and enforcement of laws against online harassment; economic incentives to encourage diversity in the workforce; encouraging more engagement amongst women networks and promoting content in local language.
Growing misinformation, disinformation, hate speech and harassment is definitely a growing issue. However, there can be no binary solution to this issue.
Fake news has always been there in our society, the only concern is with the use of technology the reach and impact has dramatically increased.
Apart from regulations, or companies introducing measures within their products or services to reduce such incidents, capacity building and educating the community on digital etiquette is important. The civil society can play a critical role in this. Also, there is a need for more academic research on these issues – including what motivates some communities to react or spread/ share news while not others, etc.
It is an issue of the whole community and can only be addressed when the whole multistakeholder community works on it together. Blocking, shutting or restricting the internet will not help.
Having said that various initiatives are being taken by online companies in tackling these issues. While few have helped, there is more that needs to be done.
To be able to address issues of inclusion it is important to have correct data which will help in formulating appropriate strategies so the suitable methodology can approach can be adopted at all levels: building infrastructure, connecting people, addressing social barriers, capacity building. There is also a need for more cooperation between different stakeholders, countries to share data, best practices and have more dialogues. This will help to address many issues.
We should also add violence against women and children. The discrimination or affect by internet to the individual internet users have to included.
The word are too hard to understand. simple word to be used if possible.
Country like Nepal, there is no MLAT or letter of rotatory provision in our country incase of trans-border crime.
Please also include this.
“Law enforcement, network operators and IT professionals “. I think we should add civil societies…
“Law enforcement, Service providers,, IT professionals, civil societies and bankers”
It may be helpful for readers to provide links to the surveys that “are showing a large decline in trust in the Internet”.
Another type of fragmentation to consider is an institutional fragmentation, i.e. fragmentation approaches to the regulation of cyberspace and Internet space.
Are developing countries only should be given support? Many economically developed countries have not developed their legislation to ensure lawful access to encrypted materials, and therefore, a dialogue to assist both developing and developed countries seems important.
It would be helpful to clearly state that there are different types of attribution (political, legal, and technical), and each type of attribution has its own challenges and requires different approaches/discussions.
Technology is neither”the panacea” nor the primary reason for the crisis of trust. Technology, which should remain neutral by default, is not what causes many risks in cyberspace, but the malicious use of technology.
national e-commerce frameworks need to enable economies to leverage the use ict’s to drive social and economical development
the benefits of such initiatives should be effectively advocated and communicated to local communities in order to leverage or realise the full benefit of the multi stakeholder engagement
I would like to see more emphasis on developing of ICT in education sector especially tempted areas in Asia Pacific cause this would probably promote and encourage a universal access policies of individuals users in ICT
After attending across border lesson, i want to add if IGF and its sponsors could contribute in building Law Enforcement capacity in future. Currently Pacific LEA are in major needs in strenghtening our capabilities in the global fight against crime.
I’m inclined to agree with KS Park that the Right to be Forgotten should not be mentioned at this time. The reason is that it is a right that comes “after” the right of privacy. Without the right of privacy, the RTBF will not be a meaningful right.
Addressing Intermediary Liability appropriately is a critical step in enhancing the use of the Internet. To that end, the Manila Principles have been drafted after extensive consultation at the RightsCon 2015. More work needs to be done to put the Manila Principles into practice.
I think that specific reference to TPP needs to be removed. Athough the TPP is the first trade agreement for the digital age, the TPP process has, regrettably, been less than exemplary from a multistakeholder perspective.
Comment: Minor tweaks, mostly for grammar and clarity. Also, I think replaced the word “balance” because the solution to arriving at a balance is a compromise, which may not be appropriate here. And in keeping with the tenor of competing, I have used that in place of “conflict”.
The right to be forgotten as a principle must be approached with caution. Significant and competing issues relating to its extraterritorial application, digitised media archives and the integrity of historical records, the rights of individuals and media freedoms must be weighed carefully.
Moreover, emerging jurisprudence suggests competing public interest as it imposes a burden of proving public interest on people searching for information or intermediaries facilitating that search such as libraries, educational institutions, archives and search engines.
Really minor: hyphenate “gender-based”
As the opening plenary was on the Gender Divide, perhaps this item should be moved higher if not close to the very top.
[Therefore strategies must infrastructure-based]
A word or phrase is missing.
This sentence is clunky. It’s too wordy and this gets in the way of being comprehensible. The suggested edit follows.
As improved technologies facilitate access for the next billion Internet users, it is important that the individual and collective uniqueness, and the linguistic, geographic and cultural diversity that these new users bring to the Internet be supported, conserved and enhanced through inclusive policy measures such as the universal acceptance of internationalised domain names.
[Whether it is security, stability and resilience of the Internet infrastructure or security of network and information systems, , to issues on safety, privacy and data protection, collaboration and capacity building are needed to mitigate and prevent cyber security incidents within and beyond the Asia Pacific region, and the setting of global encryption standards is encouraged.]
Collaboration and capacity building are needed to mitigate and prevent cyber security incidents within and beyond the Asia Pacific region, and the setting of global encryption standards is encouraged.]
[agreed international conventions and declarations]
Delete “agreed” on redundancy.
[Respect for human rights is fundamental to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).]
Recommend moving this up to the start of the paragraph.
[Human rights agreements should apply to the Internet environment in the areas of access and development, freedom of expression, right to assembly and privacy as well as on the right to information, education, health, culture, and to a broad range of other rights as set out in the WSIS Geneva Declaration of Principles, Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, and other agreed international conventions and declarations. The impact of existing and emerging laws, policies, and practices on the security of network and information systems, data protection, surveillance, anonymity, intermediary liability and cyber-crime must protect human rights and meet international standards for guarantees. These issues have been the subject of intense scrutiny and debate by all stakeholders at the APrIGF meeting. The application of human rights should also consider issues of gender, disability, age and sexuality. Respect for human rights is fundamental to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).]
Respect for human rights is fundamental to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Therefore, human rights agreements should apply to the Internet environment in such as set out in the WSIS Geneva Declaration of Principles, Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, and other international conventions and declarations. These areas include access and development, freedom of expression, right to assembly and privacy as well as on the right to information, education, health, culture. Laws, policies, and practices on the security of network and information systems, data protection, surveillance, anonymity, intermediary liability and cyber-crime must protect human rights and meet international standards for guarantees. The application of human rights should also consider issues of gender, disability, age and sexuality. These issues hwere the subject of intense scrutiny and debate by stakeholders at the APrIGF meeting.
Missing article: The
I think “legality of” in the first line should be replaced with “issues of”. The reason is that it seems to be an issue of legality but if so, any illegality can be easily “cured” be passage of a law.
Suggest amending the last sentence by adding to it the words in quotation marks:
At the same time, Internet shutdowns and restrictions are detrimental to the freedom of expression and right of universal access to Internet “and so should be kept to the minimum in duration and in compliance with due process.”
I would change from best practices to good practices. Covid-19 has shown that the internet is not a luxury but a lifeline especially in land-locked and mountainous communities, and this is why meaningful internet connectivity and affordable access to devices is imperative especially during a pandemic. This topic addresses the need to close the digital gap. Organisations and individuals in Central Asia are helping children and youths living in remote and rural communities deal with challenges in education posed by covid pandemic. It talks about their experience during the pandemic and the opportunities they are providing to the children to ensure that they remain connected and have access to affordable devices and content during a pandemic.
COVID-19 pandemic has pushed more communities online at a faster rate, accelerated the adoption of e-commerce, and facilitated the rapid dissemination of new digital skilling tools, e-health services, and remote work applications. But it has also introduced new risks that are experienced by users online such as online scams, phishing attacks, identify thefts and online bullying.
Past tense – the APrIGF was held….APrIGF co-located with…
nature of diverse Internet Governance issues and understand their significance at a policy level in all economies across the region…
Include Asia and Pacific region
Inclusion should enable everyone (including marginalised communities – persons with disabilities, rural and remote communities, youths and LGBTQI groups to contribute to and benefit from the digital economy and internet society. How can stakeholders work together to ensure meaningful connectivity, access and affordable internet for all. How can we ensure that no one is left behind?
UNESCAP, ISOC, ITU, GSMA and A4AI has done a status of connectivity in APAC. There are some great insights captured in this document – https://www.unescap.org/kp/2021/towards-meaningful-connectivity-insights-asia-pacific-case-studies
I agree with everyone but we should also allow new voices from marginalised communities (they are usually left behind). I would also include new voices from rural and remote communities, persons with disabilities, LGBTQI communities etc.
In some countries, social media is regulated. Regulating the internet or social media violates the basic human right – everyone should have the freedom to express online or via social media but they need to do it with common sense. Because they have a sense of responsibility so you can make a point but with kindness.
Please change from paste tense to present progressive tense.
It would be great to mention inclusion in the context of accessibility for everyone. It’s not just about digital skills but also about making sure that everyone has the same opportunities to participate in IG regardless of their gender, age, ability or location or disability. And we need to ensure that marginalized and minority groups are included in the IG discussions (especially LGBTQIA+ groups and women and girls, disability community). Is it possible to change ‘for all to ‘for everyone’ ?
to ensure that no-one is left behind and to support access to meaningful connectivity and affordable access…
ranging from ….can we also add small island states e.g Tuvalu or Vanuatu?
Agree with Swaran.
This is a great point.
Is there a sector on other emerging technologies and the fourth industrial revolution?
Include the discussion of Armed conflict in case of a Cyber attack.
The design challenges of IOT and what policy considerations needs to be adopted.
New Security Considerations when IOT is merging with Industrial Control systems. Is it creating challenges for Critical National Infrastructure?
Contribution from audience at Day 1 town hall session: Place holder topics
– Intermediary Liability, Manila Principles
– Capacity Building, bringing people in to have a better access to training and education and training and participation.
Contribution from audience at Day 1 town hall session: Local language, Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) and Email Address Internationalization (EAI).
Contribution from audience at Day 1 town hall session:
– Participation by women
– Rights to accessibility
– Right to Information, proactive disclosure, internet platform for obtaining information from state agencies.
Question from audience at Day 1 town hall session: The Budapest convention is a global cybercrime convention, the Internet is truly global, would a regional convention be very useful?
– Issues related to spectrum for connectivity
– Net Neutrality
Contribution from workshop participant: placeholder topic and text:
– Multi-stakeholder model
The use of the multistakeholder model in Internet governance receives broad support internationally. Multistakeholder model encourages coordination and planning through a consensus-making process and recognizes the need to incorporate regional and local Internet governance context and strategies. Its implementation and efficiency thus undergo continuous testing and refinement. There are ongoing efforts to explore means for greater participation in multistakeholder processes and to work towards an inclusive multistakeholder method.
New proposed section: Capacity Building (Joyce Chen, ICANN, Townhall 1)
Thank you for your comment. These are questions for APrIGF attendees to let us know what they hope to see discussed at the APrIGF workshops. The event is still ahead so we are not concluding anything at the moment.
Can capacity building be part of this section?
Same with the PWD accessibility – can this be included here?
Can this part be merged with Paragraph 28? I think both have a primary purpose of putting people online.
An addition to capacity building, maybe we can also add YIGF as one of the programs that provides an avenue for the said area.
As an addition, maybe the document can be in multiple languages for the benefit of people who are not natives of the English language. :-)
For easier discussion, this part should be better break up into one paragraph per one discussion topic.
May be not only recommendations, but documented concerns, agreements, and disagreements.
3. Preventing Data-based Discrimination — more and more data, including personal data and public data, are collected and available for processing, this can leads to better services, new products, improved efficiency in different kinds of operations, which all could lead to better life of people in the society. At the same time, this could lead to discrimination to a person or a community based on collected data or analysed output. We should ensure that this will be prevented from the design of the network.
“Chair’s Summary” is interesting, as it clearly signify where’s the Summary comes from.
My suggestion is that, APrIGF could adopted a different or a same name, no need to be exactly the same as the global IGF, as long as it clearly signify where’s the document comes from.
Whether this document will be a Summary, a Recommendation, a Statement, etc. is left to be discussed — some people already did this at http://comment.rigf.asia/table-of-contents/aprigf-asia-2015/aprigf-macao-2015-outcomes-document/#psR
Some countries allow wifi hotspots without licenses, although their cybercrime law put (criminal) liabilities to intermediaries like wifi — so less people eager to share their wifi. Community wifi also got affected, as the operator of the network will face legal risks.
Example: Article 15 of Thailand’s 2007 Computer-related Crime Act.
Support more integration of regional Youth IGF and regional IGF. — The arrangement of timetable should allow Youth participants to join any session as they wish. May be by have a separated, preparatory process, of Youth IGF one day before IGF.
Encourage workshop proposal to include youth as a panelist. Although, during the workshop process, youth should be treat as equal to other participants — there will be no special treatment.
Find ways to support national Youth IGF to happen.
These priority issues are sorted by? .. Alphabetical order?
Or probably “Data-driven discrimination”.
Replacing “recommendations” with an agreed term in the Sub-heading.
Can we call this “Privacy-by-design”?
providing some statistics, like numbers of days open (start date, end date), numbers of comments, etc. would be very interesting and will give the reader the idea of the participation in our process :)
should also mention the arbitration mechanism that would allow foreign companies to challenge domestic regulations before international arbitration panels.
if section is to be included, it should made clear that the “right to be forgotten” (in quote) is another concept related to right to privacy, but not the same.
The information that RTBF deals with is a data that is (or should be) already the in public, and to be decided whether to keep it further public or not.
The information that the right to privacy deals with is data that shouldn’t be in the public in the first place.
Computer code will be more effective in practical that legal code in this Machine to Machine.
How to do the governance? As it’s not obvious to average people.
What about scope it down to only “critical information infrastructure” ?
I suggested “cyber-security” to be replaced by “security of network and information systems” which is more self-explanatory.
[new laws and policies]
to be replaced with
“existing and emerging laws, policies, and practices”
In the context of cross-border data transfer and local people using online services provided from servers in foreign jurisdictions, this is problematic.
I proposed this title and text:
“Protection without borders
Expectation of privacy may vary by cultures, thus different protections in different jurisdictions. Considering the nature of cross-border data transfer for online services and users’ difficulties to aware of that complication, if there is a difference in the level of protection in relevant jurisdictions, the highest level of protection should be guaranteed as a default safeguard. Minimum adequate level of privacy protection should also be sought after as an international agreement and adopted by every concerned jurisdictions.”
To protection person in question, if there is difference in the protection of suspect/defendant in relevant jurisdictions, the MLAT should honour the highest level of protection.
Regarding to this, please also refer to para 37 (“respect to cultural differences” – privacy protection in different jurisdiction).
Propose: “Protection of critical information infrastructure”
may be merged with para 30?
Or put emphasised on the new challenges that IoT will bring, like difficulties to patch large among of outdated devices, privacy violations from Big Data and linked data (made possible by large-scale data collection and smarter algorithms).
If we can frame it for a better protection of privacy, there’s no need to remove.
Surprisingly, currently we don’t have a specific section dedicated to Privacy or Data Protection.
Three-part test of legality, legitimacy and proportionality must be ensured to be passed for all relevant jurisdiction in the investigation or prosecution. An oversight of the process must bee required from all participating countries. Data about requests should be made available to the public, for the interest of transparency and accountability.
Agree. If we can start with Convention on Cybercrime. And try to improve the Convention if feels inadequate.
Data about requests should be…
Data about requests, such as user data request and shutdown request, should be…
(give examples, for readability)
protection from … [illegal] and harmful online contents
mind the word “illegal”, as the legality and legitimacy are two different things.
Encrypted (“secure and private”) communication is illegal in some countries, for example.
Suggest to add a point on consideration for “expiration date” of protection measure and mechanism.
Some data encryption or data masking used today to protection data may works today but not necessary works 10 years from now. But the owner of the personal data still alive, without the protection.
More comments will be collected from workshop “WS83 Upgrade Required: Obfuscation and cryptographic standards for data protection law in the age of linked and big data” tomorrow – http://apps.2017.rigf.asia/submission/proposaldetail?id=113
[ protection of children and youth]
Not only children and youth are vulnerable. Senior citizens are too, if they have lesser experience about the internet.
Child protection in itself is an idea from offline world that taken for granted that senior citizens are more experienced. This is not true for online, may be true in the future but not now.
Because computer getting faster, more data available, reidentification techniques are smarter. — Data encryption, data masking, data obfuscation techniques for data protection that work 10 years ago may not work today. Those work today may not work 10 years from now.
This means the owner of the personal data who still alive 10 years from now will no longer have technical protection.
The regulation should address this and make the regulation future-proof, at least to the life span of a human.
[resilience to disasters]
While ‘resilience to disasters’ and, in general, ‘availability’ (which is part of information security) is important, I don’t think it should come as the first thing under ‘Access’.
Hmm.. or should the substances from the discussion be mentioned in the relevant sections, instead of having a separated section on youth? I’m thinking more of the integration of all demographic groups.
Say, if there’s a concern or observation on cybersecurity from the YIGF role-play, should that comment be put in cybersecurity section? Likewise, if there’s a comment from YIGF on access, put it in access section.
Data protection section should mention about the data-driven discrimination.
Right to explanation (of algorithmic decision-making) is proposed in WS80.
The International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance (the “Necessary and Proportionate Principles” or “13 Principles”) should be mentioned here, as it is one of the principle related to the most fundamental part of the internet and it is in itself the principle that developed in multi-stakeholders fashion.
Conclusion section is needed.
[Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and Email Address Internationalization (EAI)]
In order to support this, as well as other native language interface and input/output, the infrastructure like Unicode encoding and supporting fonts for languages are also needed.
There are also cases that the Unicode for a language is supported on desktop operating systems, but not on mobile operating systems. This rendered the access
to names and contents in that language impossible or confusing.
Take the example of non-Unicode ‘Zawgyi’ font of Burmese language, which is popular in mobile phones but make it difficult to access to Burmese Wikipedia. (for more details, see ‘Burmese Wikipedia’ in English Wikipedia)
The problem now is that many mobile phone vendors prefer to install non-Unicode font (‘Zawgyi’ in Burmese) as default font of their devices.
While installing Unicode font is possible by the user, it takes further effort and technical skill which not necessarily has in every users.
Mobile phone manufacturers should work together with internet governance community and language community [esp ethnic/minority language communities] to guarantee access to languages in a standard way on the internet.
This comment (on character encoding, font, and access) has been addressed in side-event Internet Universality Indicators by UNESCO and APC during APrIGF 2017 (29 July 2017).
Mobile phone and IoT manufacturers and software developers should responsible on providing security patch in a timely manner for a guaranteed period of time after the time of purchase.
‘Capacity building’ is pretty much addressed and highlighted in different venues of internet governance, but cybersecurity & privacy on the internet platform is the area where capacity building alone doesn’t work — as people are heavily rely on the device and network that they use – and they don’t have a [technological/administrative/legal] permission to upgrade/update/patch these devices by themselves even they do have ‘capacity’.
Safe behavior on vulnerable device is not safe.
There should be a form of regulation to make sure that internet-connected manufacturers will take responsible in making their devices secure for a reasonable time period.
For example, if the average mobile phone changing cycle of consumers is 3 years, the reasonable time period for manufacturers to keep releasing security patch of their mobile phone can be 3 years or more.
Support this comment on FOSS, which can also related to the transparency of algorithmic decision-making as well – as discussed in WS80.
Agree. At least it is the fact that Convention on Cybercrime is signed in 2001 or 16 years ago.
Internet has changed a lot since then. Facebook founded on 2004, YouTube 2005. iPhone released in 2007, Android in 2008. It’s quite a different internet.
How about having a “Human-readable version”, like what Creative Commons License has? :D
May take a ‘drop-down bullet’ approach adopt by Manila Principles on Intermediary Liability (google that).
Show simplified headings, click on a heading for more explanation bullets. And a click on ‘Read More’ for background papers full of references.
Please link to https version when available.
Please link to https version.
Wonder if this short url (igf asia / WS_1) will be a permanent link?
If it’s not and the destination may change in the future, we shouldn’t use it for reference. (should use the full url instead)
[Community networks and public access to ICT]
We have at least three big things here, at least according to the heading “Access, Empowerment, and Diversity” – and may need to break this down to subsections for readability.
This is more about infrastructure, and as other comments already pointed out, can be many things in this package.
To take something similar from other public policy circle, can think of 3As of Availability, Accessibility, and Affordability, widely adopted in public heath, or 5As, with additional of Adequacy and Appropriateness, from patient perspectives.
Resilience is also here [WS 38].
“Digital Economy” workshop like [WS 57] is obviously connected to this subsection.
This may be more about the ability of a person or a social group to use the available infrastructure.
Digital natives (youth) [WS 41], digital migrants (older people who new to digital environment), and marginalized communities whose their offline social status may also undermined their online social status, should be all under the consideration of this Empowerment section.
(The ‘Internet Universality Indicators’ by UNESCO seems to discussed a lot on this.)
IDN, EAI, Unicode, fonts, local contents are here – and may need collaboration with wider circles and this is something that have to rely on standards that larger that internet alone.
I understand that the librarian people who attend IGF take this very serious. May able to take more comments from [WS 74].
Take one example: Mother who have to raise their kids at home all day can’t afford to go to telecenter. This is Access + Empowerment issues combined and an example of building network or access points alone does not necessary addressed the access problem.
So in this sense [WS 93] can also be discussed here (there are a lot of overlapping, i know).
We should also include the work espionage.
Building trust is not a easy process. Building online trust is much harder since many people are not still familiar with the digital technology.
Transparency could be one of the solution. Government and private sectors companies should provide them how they are using the data for what purpose. The role of media is also very important in building online trust because people are usually convinced by a lot of media. Once the media mislead some information, it will spread throughout many communities. Therefore, misinformation and disinformation should be strongly restricted by the government by digital laws and regulation.
It is worth mentioning that Internet usage also comes with adverse effects when it is been abused or overused. Having the capability to address the risks aspect on individual digital wellbeing should be part of user literacy for maintaining the trust of the Internet.
First sentence sounds a bit stretch, digital is one of many enabler for the global economy. We should not forget other enablers such as infrastructure, education, science and technology.
I think we should distinguish between ” free flow of information” and “free flow of data”. So the sentence can be rephrased as: how do we ensure a successful economy with trust, free flow of data, and appropriate domestic and global rules well balancing privacy, security and other regulatory concerns including financial and tax regulations.
First sentence sounds a bit stretch, digital is one of many enabler for the global economy. We should not forget other enablers such as infrastructure, education, science and technology.
Sorry this should paragraph 10 not 6. Please ignore this comment
In WS105 panel on digital trade and development, concerns were expressed about the implications of the trade rules which have been agreed in recent free trade agreements and proposed at the World Trade Organization such as: cross-border data flows, e-signatures, restrictions on access to source code and algorithms, for: privacy, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, algorithmic bias/discrimination, financial regulation, tax collection, health, environment, competition law etc. It was explained that data should not be treated as a commodity and our rights should flow with the data. There was consensus among the panelists that the trade rules are already out of date compared to the fast-moving technology and would not solve the access, connectivity and affordability challenges in the region.
The ‘free flow of data’ narrative should not be considered the default norm. Our data is not a trade commodity and it should not be treated as such. Privacy is a fundamental human right; thus it should flow alongside our data throughout the data life cycle. There should be check and balances to the free flow of data.
Our rights should flow alongside our data throughout the data life cycle.
People should be in control over their data, no matter where they are and no matter who holds it. Data ownership implies that people can sell away their fundamental rights, including privacy. Thus, we need comprehensive data protection laws and other regulatory mechanisms that are designed to safeguard people, not international businesses nor state control over their citizens. But we also need regulations that encourage healthy competition, not data monopolies.
I’ve a comment on the last paragraph where we are using cybersecurity and cyber crime as synonyms. Need a new paraphrase.
I think, cyber policy makers are key stakeholders who make cyber policy including laws.
I think, the first sentence os a bit wrong, dependency on IPv^, DNSSEC and routigh Security only ?? Well, I’m not convinced. Need rework on the para. We can say, these are some of major issues to be addressed !
Who should take these education or awareness ?
Privecy and Data Protection are always critical issues, not only now.
Can we have APAC regional level Disaster preparedness network ? Any discussion in that line ?
There are many economies in APAC who criminalizes blockchains and similar new technologies, were there any discussion on addressing the issue? Does this recommends or urges to address the issue?
I found some Asia and Pacific participants perspective. Are we dis integrating Asia Pacific into Asia and Pacific ?
I am not sure law enforcement should get such a prominent role in safeguarding that the internet is a safe place. Sure, LE needs to enforce the law but I think responsibility to safety on, and security of the Net rests with users, ISPs, industry and the like. Furthermore LE across the globe never will have the ability to live up to such a responsibility.
If these questions should reflect the discussion during APrIGF; I feel the focus was much more on capacity development, awareness raising, and another interesting view, different interpretations of security across the region. The threat perception in the Pacific being different from Asia and Aus/NZ.
As for the IPv6 deployment ,ICANN may encourage Governments of each country to come up with some stimulation plans such as “If you transfer to IPv6 ,tax deductibility is available! ” to urge companies to transfer from IPv4 to IPv6.
Suggested addition: The challenge then is for us to streamline investments towards an integrated digital economy. The same is accorded to how data is prized as a government asset and a catalyst for private sector investments.
Suggested Addition: The bottomline objective is to build on the experience of the multi-stakeholder process involving government, businesses, civil society and other sectors of the digital community, and to harness their energies into bringing the benefits of the digital economy to all citizens.
Suggested addition: As a basic right, qualified access to information is a democratizing platform and with this sense of confidence, the APrIGF lays the necessary groundwork for the development of the broadband ecosystem for the use of internet in participatory democracy.
agree with tying in with Global IGF
More importantly, the idea is to integrate the YIGF participants as much as possible to the main session. They might not be able to participate confidently in the APrIGF, but they would bring their observations back to their small-scale group discussion. It plants a seed and a path for gradual progress.
If go one step further, can also incorporate encouragement of youth to participate in panels to add extra points to the workshop. This mechanism would encourage workshop organisers to add a youth perspective to their workshop.
Agree on that they should be treated equally as other participants during the conference
Also wanted to establish a sustainable initiative and common ground to exchange and to come up with consensus, for example the establishment of an Asia Pacific regional research network focused on child online safety.
For me, we should be able to resolve access first because too many people still do not have access to the internet – the rural poor, PWDs who are not provided for with appropriate assistive devices, and many others like students and ordinary workers. For example, in the education sector alone, where because of the pandemic, schools are still closed, and learning is limited to poor internet limited sessions, and printed modules left to the responsibility of the parents and students to fulfill. Inclusion is the major issue, until we resolve that, the rest remain to be the issue of the privileged and connected. But that is not to say that we should not address sustainability and trust. just that we focus more on inclusion. This is also to reduce the digital divide.
Internet education should be part of the life skills training since we also need to teach young people to protect themselves from harm in the internet, and not just its beneficial use.
Actually it’s not just the weaponization of surveillance but even of one policy fits all approach to the pandemic. The high handed approach have shown how government officials, particularly in the frontline – police, community officials – could go beyond their mandate in implementing what they thought were right. Some minors suffered corporal punishments for violating curfew, while other people were charged with cyber libel for questioning the local officials’ response to the pandemic. Luckily most of them were thrown out by prosecutors or the courts, but not after the hassle of being arrested, published on social media, and detained for a time. Worst, government-paid trolls extol these kind of actions as necessary for discipline and compliance to pandemic control.
include “gender equality”
I also support the suggestion to delete this sentence. despite of cultural differnce, privacy should be regarded as universal human rights.
this is thecomment on para 37
There should be more discussion on Free and open-source software (FOSS). Since, it is one of the fundamental components for an internet that is open and accessible to all, an internet that repects our privacy. FOSS ensures that we have control over the technology we use in our daily life. FOSS ensures that the technology we use is transparent, and does not do anything malicious behind our back.
Sorry, this comment supposes to be for the whole document not just for this paragraph.
The advance of technology has undoubtedly brings convenience and benefits to society. However, according to PwC’s Global State of Information Security Survey dated 2015, the cybercrime market worth $114 billion, which is bigger than the cocaine market ($85 billion, quote from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, World Drug Report 2011). Therefore, I believe it is necessary to evaluate the Cyber Maturity Framework of organizations which provide new technologies prior launching /on a regular basis. The Cyber Maturity Framework consists of four capability areas: Respond, Identify, Detect and Protect).
Assesses the organisation’s ability to respond and recover from external and internal attacks against its systems and data.
Assesses the organisation’s ability to understanding the threats and appropriately manage the associated security risk to systems, assets, data and capabilities.
Assesses the organisation’s ability to detect external and internal attacks of varying sophistication against its systems and data.
Assesses the organisations ability to implement security controls to reduce the risk of threats being realised (e.g. loss of data or system outage).
I believe partnerships and collaborations between different companies and regulators may help the underserve communities and regions to catch up with the pace of digital boom.
For instance, Ant Financial (Alibaba Group’s mobile payment affiliate) decided to partner with Touch N’ Go to develop their e-wallet rather than break in with Alipay in Maylasia. This can ensure healthy business synergy in both companies. Also, the regulators may consult the fintech companies when building new regulations to ensure the law is down to earth and can be implemented while balancing the business development and cybersecurity.
Maybe it will be more comprehensive to add “age” as a variable factor like gender? For example, I think social media platforms Twitter and Facebook and online political events provide more opportunities for the youth to express their opinions and participate in such events. Not only in terms of politics, but also influences the youth culture, making youth subculture attracts more people. Especially in China, we can see a rapid growth of youth subculture texts. Typical examples are meme and idol culture.
Some theories of philosophers indicate that the logics of technology heavily influence our traditional logic, preparing us human for digital logic. So, maybe be we can talk about some changes in the definition of our humans, like the studies of “embody” in media and technology.
[Privacy and data protection are critical issues now, especially as they may come into conflict with freedom of expression]
Is this trying to say “right of privacy” as “universal human right”? If yes, then the correct reference should be Article 13 of 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The freedom of speech is in Article 19. Conflict between privacy and freedom of expression usually discuss in a context of press freedom. I would suggest to frame privacy as enabler of freedom of expression, as in Article 17-19 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
[A multi-stakeholder approach to identify and address key risks is a positive way forward to addressing cybersecurity issues which within the Asia Pacific region]
I think there may be a word missing between which and within
PACIGF Notes on Cybersecurity:
The Fiji Government has recently introduced an Online Safety Bill that will see irresponsible social media users paying up to $20k in fine and face imprisonment of up to five years if investigated by the Online Safety Commission and found guilty.
This bill will impact on hateful and harmful electronic communications and the posting of intimate visual recordings that would impact women and children as victims.
52% of the countries have adopted DNSSEC in the Pacific
Sorry maybe the above comment should go under Online Privacy and Protection
It is costly for companies to implement and also maintain infrastructure because the islands in the Pacific are too spread out, also there are natural disasters occurring every year
Pacific Internet exchange point: Vanuatu, PNG and now Fiji
In the Pacific there is an Australian Government program called Pacific Connect with a focus on Fiji, Samoa, PNG, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Tonga to engage digital and ICT initiatives in the areas of government digital/innovation, cyber engagement, leadership, women, and research. The program is said to be about putting the ‘right’ people in the room to connect and work on mutually beneficial issues. The two year pilot program’s theme is: Building Australia-Pacific Connections for the Digital Future
Digital Technology is still fairly new with a technical Startup called TraSeable Solutions implementing Seafood Provenance and OxFam (humanitarian relief cash transfers) with other projects like Fiji’s land registry on blockchain, PNG- palm oil supply chain and national identity and supply chain projects
There is still a need for alot to be done.
Also need for a bridge between IGF communities and spaces. The need to bring multi stakeholder models to the Pacific Nations
A need for all to come together with your own skills for your own areas. To collaborate and work together to achieve national requirements
PacIGF concluded with the need to learn from each other and help each other also a more inclusive approach where for example the legal people highlighted that they are always the last to know and only if there is a problem but they would like to be more informed and in the loop from the beginning
There are different roles that government, industry (both small and large actors) and other stakeholder groups can play in promoting the adoption of standards. It’s also important to be very clear about the arguments for such adoption and how they are targeted for most effect.
As discussed in WS 83, Public Libraries are ideal places for Internet access where users can be guided in a secure, inclusive, impartial, free and non-threatening environment. In New Zealand, for example, free Digital Literacy/Skills sessions are commonly held in Public Libraries on specific topics or for marginalised groups. Communities in small developing nations can be empowered through provision of Internet and information access in Libraries.
Need to include Youth into the discussion and policy development process, as Regional IGF and regional YIGF more.
Need to ensure more opportunities for the newcomer to be engaged in the process. Not just provide the opportunities but to ensure the information about them is spread across the community.
Why only in General Elections? We need to combat Disinformation in all aspects of human life.
And how can general user contribute as well.
Very interesting to learn new concept regarding the topic on Cyber security
I was graduate with a bachelor in Computing Systems in Auckland and interest also in Cyber security which I also have some related subjects in term of malware Analysis,System Security Botnet,Fishing etc…..I would like more if the stake holder could provide more pratical worshop on this topic of Cyber security.
For my little state Island I wish if my community need to understand more about online Privacy and data Protection to help young people to their respective environment to have what this topic is all about.
For my Island State I wish if APRIGF can deal with our local Government IT center to run awareness more on access and Empowerment of using Digital device through internet.
I wish if our Government IT center to create a digital e-commerce shopping online to satisfy every citizen living in my country(vanuatu).
i really want to see a diversity of people with different norms and values to participate and engage in Digital world.
The word ‘legitimate’ can mean something that ‘conforms to the law’. In many countries (such as India), several consensual and harmless acts online are classified as ‘obscene’, ‘seditious’ etc., and so, ‘illegitimate’ under the law. Can ‘legitimate’ be replaced with ‘ethical’?
Here, too, can ‘legitimate’ be replaced with ‘ethical’ because various ethical uses of the internet are wrongfully and unconstitutionally classified as illegitimate under the law in countries like India – such as, laws on obscenity, sedition, unlawful activities etc.
The issue of diversity and accessibility (under the Inclusion track) intersect within the context of the “digital language divide” as language affects users’ experience of the Internet – it guides who can access and meaningfully participate in online spaces, what content/information we access (and thus, which knowledge we reproduce), whom we speak to, and how we behave in online communities. Inequality in representation in different languages online also shapes how we understand our place in the world. To support greater linguistic diversity on the Internet, tech organizations (profit and nonprofit) running search engines and online encyclopedias need to amplify their translation initiatives/solutions and governments need to develop policies and programs that support and facilitate online linguistic diversity and multilingualism.
I suggest the expansion of the notion of diversity and accessibility here to include the issue of linguistic representation online.
Hate speech intersects with disinformation and misinformation when the content of hate speech is based on non-factual information – which is often the case in the APAC region. Amid gaps in hate speech legislation in the region, bottom-up, human-centered approach to counter online hate speech, such as using human experts to conduct fact-checking could address issues with automated content moderation which most online platforms rely on. These issues include the difficulty in identifying hate speech content across multiple languages and differing social and cultural contexts (the context-dependent nature of hate speech) and biases in machine moderation.
While fact-checking that relies on human experts is a more reliable approach, the volume and speed with which online hate speech is produced and disseminated make the effort seem unsustainable. Another issue is the reach of fact-checking output – Is the public aware of such an initiative? Who visits factchecking sites? Which intermediaries disseminate the fact-checking output?
To address the second issue, it is important that fact-checking organizations form partnerships with online networking platforms, the local media organizations – national and regional, and other relevant intermediaries to scale the fact-checking effort. Further, more research needs to be done to best bring together manual and automated approaches to fact-checking and content moderation toward human-in-the-loop system/method.
These bottom-up approaches need to be accompanied by advocacy efforts targeting regulatory changes at the national and regional levels. The recommendations of the 2020 Asia-Pacific Regional Forum on Hate Speech, Social Media, and Minorities could serve as a basis that clarifies the role and responsibility of different stakeholders in countering hate speech and provide examples of relevant multistakeholder frameworks for monitoring hate speech.
Recommendations of the 2020 Asia-Pacific Regional Forum on Hate Speech, Social Media, and Minorities:
Inclusion should not be only for digitally literate people but also for those who are digitally as well as socially illiterate. Their voice need to be in digital space. Discussion should include in this topic as well.
The encouragement is most for local youth IG in their respective region. More opportunities need to given for these youth who is represtenting the status of their local IG space not only as fellows but also as speaker, panelist, moderator, organizer. Any role they can play and make their voices reach out loud in reapective dimesion.
the name of the program is mislead
the discussion is interesting but it does not touch the point about what is the hack
actually, I understand about we will show about idea or prototype of “hacking” government or surveillance. but we just talk about platform for collect violent data.
With respect to Universal Acceptance…
The Internet DNS has already provided support for IDNs and they have been in production since 2009. What needs to happen now, both in respect to IDNs and all new TLDs, is that the developers of computer programmes and systems need to catch up so that they take advantage of these new facilities.
Readers, including businesses, governments and civil society participants, should make sure that their own systems are UA Ready – that is that they can accept, validate, store, process and display all domain names equally. This is an issue not just at the top level, but at second and subsequent levels as well.
They should also encourage their suppliers and the providers of services they use to become UA Ready.
[NB: This editing application is an example of one that does NOT accept IDN e-mail addresses]
Combined efforts from public, private and community sectors is needed to create sustainable initiatives to solve issues of affordable accessibility and digital literacy for all. Effort is also necessary to support local languages in all facets. Developments are also necessary is safe and affordable electronic payment facilities to allow everyone to facilitate sustainable activities.
A call to action here would be beneficial, calling on Spectrum Managers within each community to de-licence WiFi spectrum.
Satish, either will be fine, in my view.
“Trust” is a challenging term because it’s so broad. When I first read this, I thought how can we ensure that justice is served when our trust is broken by naughty people? Communities adopting similar legal frameworks for addressing scams and allowing cross border enforcement would be a way of building Trust. If you order a book from me, and I don’t deliver, then you should be able to easily pursue remedies.
But there’s also the Trust of accuracy of information. And the Trust that the information that I transmit is secure between me and its intended recipient.
Expanding digital literacy and access will also have a (generally) positive economic impact. I’ve seen reports that a 10% increase in access results in a 1% increase in GDP. It is important, I think, to make sure that Digital Literacy goes hand-in-hand with Access because this will ensure users will be able to discern good from naughty.
(PS: Your system rejected my IDN email address)
There is a LOT of meat in this one paragraph and could well do with breaking it up.
Should there also be encouragement for consistency across jurisdiction so that bad guys can’t hide somewhere where there’s inconsistent rules from where they act.
[serious economic consequences]
…serious economic, social and cultural consequences…
Not all new technologies would contribute positively to the economy.
We need to acknowledge that technology is not inherently good and it also has some adverse effect on society.
What does “markets” refer to in the first paragraph?
add guidelines on the first line……therefore should read, after implementation of policies, guidelines and best practices…..
Emphasis to implement and conduct awareness and education to multi-stakeholders on existing national laws that have provisions of collecting and possessing data privacy
also the key to inclusive and diversity is to promote innovative development
also the key to inclusive and diversity is to promote innovative development. (this sentence should read here and not above)
In addition to Government providing policy environment for access it should include for services as well and further financial support to drive local content and demand driven solutions
just started in the Pacific
In the Pacific especially Vanuatu digital economy is in its early stages especially with e-commerce it is only popular among tourism industry due to payment systems not fully integrated into the local commercial Banks.
Digital trade and ecommerce will also promote traditional and cultural practices to produce more of local products example local handicraft when global market drives demand.
Along with copy right rules, the need of e – education must be extended in an affordable price to children and youth in remote and rural communities.
Awareness and training on Capacity building and Internet Governance processes is required for educators.
Proper accress to Internet is still a dream. Hardly 10% residents have proper access to Internet in Asia. In India it is 50% still. I found no discussion and solution over the issue here in draft. Exclusive inclusion of all the stakeholders is required to solve the issues. We are in need of some sophisticated technology at most affordable rates to increase the access of Internet to the bottom of pyramid.
This can be rephrased as “Building a secured Internet ultimately means improving on the cybersecurity standards and the ability to trace malicious activities”
Thanks for the comments Mr.Babu. This sentence can be rephrased as “The future stability and security of the Internet highly depends on the successful implementation of policies and best practices, and by addressing the increased implementation of few major issues like IPv6, DNS Security Extensions(DNSSEC) and routing security”
No special educators for this awareness, we need to bring about evidence based training that needs to be exchanges among the peers and shared with the community
Cyber Security is still a fully undiscovered area and participation by the internet community to focus on capacity building effort will alone is not suffice and there should be some capacity building that are technically designed to handle insecured situations on the Internet. The community can also aim to come out with a Security Framework that can act as a platform for future enhancements.
Internet being ubiquitous how much online privacy does an individual have? Do we have any latest tools or security techniques that enhances the safety of online transactions and that improves our privacy on the cyber space?
When filling the digital gap and making Internet available to all regardless of socio-economic status, gender and age. Pointing out on the age factor is digital inclusion applicable for all ages? will this not have a greater impact on the children, kindly suggest more on this.
Developing programmes for digital literacy in all languages at the same time it becomes necessary to take steps and measures on involving people actively to participate in such initiatives. For Example: Inclusion of Women into Internet Governance from the Asia Pacific Region exclusively from India demands more compromises with family members, in such situations what steps can we initiate to make the digital literacy to reach the whole mass.
The Internet has become a place for people to make a living. One of the platforms for this is video sharing. Popular sites such as YouTube has served as the platform for content creators to generate their own income by means of their own videos, typically funded by ad revenue. What creates issue with this is that there are content creators who rely on the content of other people, adhering to “fair use” as their legal protection. Despite such protection, this does not stop creators to file lawsuits citing copyright infringement. Theft of intellectual property is also an issue that reaps the same consequences. This legal conflict is a threat to the thriving entertainment industry, as well as economic prospects for individuals. Therefore, a clear and detailed criteria on what constitutes as theft of intellectual property should be imposed.
in WS59 a theme emerged around the importance of understanding the dynamics of diversity, in that it changes over time on different issues and as such discussion evolves through stages. That diversity is not an absolute or finite value, and that cultural diversity is highly relevant for the AP region in the global IG context, especially in the development of rough consensus (i.e. to avoid dominant cultural bias causing undue influence over results of discussions given cultures in AP’s tendency towards deference to authorities)
WS57 discussed the growing importance of investigating illegal wildlife trade online, and the effectiveness of cross jurisdictional processes are becoming increasingly critical. At the same time though, privacy and other user rights must not be compromised. Industry code of practices are important beyond legislation.
WS57 highlighted the merging physical space with cyberspace in the sense that the internet and ecommerce is having a direct impact on wildlife and the environment, (poaching supported by demand from convenience of ecommerce). At the same time ecommerce and elearning can support rural economies to discourage poaching. the SDGs and their interrelation with the Internet and Internet Governance is exemplified by supportive policies and technologies deployed for wildlife conservation (especially as it intersects with rural populations and least developed areas in the proximity of endangered species)
Universal Acceptance is a part of a bigger issue of making sure that the Internet’s Critical Infrastructure protocols evolve over time in an open standards manner. For the synthesis document, I would suggest that we add text suggesting that: Universal Acceptance of Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) and Email Address Internationalization (EAI) for systems online is a matter of priority not only for ensuring that Asia Pacific users can utilize their native language to navigate the Internet, but also as an imperative for the continued evolution of the core Internet infrastructure protocols, including the enhancement of scalability (e.g. IPv6), security (e.g. DNSSEC) and multilingual capability (e.g. IDN) of such protocols.
using of AIs regulating Digital Economies
Understanding the risk; the people with disabilities as the target of datafication on social protection programmes.
It’s also importance to acknowledge the power relation between stakeholders are currently not equal, and to treat all voices equally there should be a visible effort to address it.
There’s a need to provide the knowledge in an understandable language, not only for abled people, but also for the community who might not have the same understanding or language or perception yet (eg. deaf communities) to address all sorts of things pertaining to digital livelihood.
Talking about inclusion, there’s also need to engage and include the law enforcement as often they are at the end of enforcing law but does not really have the understanding of how important it is to have human rights based approach and intervention on internet governance matter.
I agree on this. In Indonesia there’s also a11y focused community, such as Mitra Netra (for the blind/visually impaired) and Suarise-a consultant to improve a11y access for PwDs, but the focus is more on jobs access and not yet to engage them in the discussion of internet governance. We need to engage them too.
On the impact of the GDPR on the APAC region. Many APAC countries are implementing privacy & data protection laws directly informed by the GDPR (see Indonesia’s proposed law and Australia’s upcoming amendments to the Privacy Act). Very welcome to see this GDPR influence as the digital economy grows faster in APAC than any other region in the world!
Particularly on the note of underserved and rural regions, who currently don’t have full access to the digital economy; what happens once the economies of scale which power the non-digital economy cease? What happens when the balance tips in favour of digital transactions, supply chain management and inventory control? Will the non-digital solutions cease and leave the underserved communities behind?
It’s the job of the internet community to make sure that these communities are not left behind on the march to innovation.
Community Engagement in Different Stakeholders for Data Protection for government monitoring & controlling perspective of South East Asia with comparison to western world
Capacity building starts at the grass root and a good example of the Vanuatu IGF that were established during APRIGF. It would be good to revisit the impact of such intiative in training locals on how to safely navigate the Internet. This initiative can be driven by local government initiative such the CERT Vanuatu.
This section does not address how we can strengthen existing stakeholders such as CERTs. It does mention these initiatives but there is a need to determine how CERTs and any other domain interact with organisation such as ICANN, APNIC, and other train providers to strengthen their skills in term of responding to threats.
To make IG ecosystem more impactful we need collaboration more especially the youth IG groups collaboration like youth4IG, YCIG etc. I believe that youth has the power to have a good impact on IG. Besides it is important to be aware of IG issues from the early stage of their life.
The 1st policy question is too broad and theoretical. It would be better to make comparative approach between de facto and de jure of the national laws to assess its own interpretation in accordance with its provisions. On the other hand, there is a possibility that national law is influenced by conventions or international agreement which subsequently established universally-applied principles. If I were to suggest, the terms “regulations” could be replaced with principles we internationally adopt as a matter of comparison.
The 3rd policy question should be narrowed down a little bit as it may create confusion such as the role of government in the protection of human rights online based on what? the regulations? Please point out a context you want to refer to, since I believe that there are various cases that involve the governments with different measures. For example, there is a legitimacy of surveillance under certain conditions (proportionality, necessity, etc).
Human rights are by universal. The phrasing “especially the different balance required at different stages of development” should be deleted, as it seems to suggest that the importance attached to human rights varies depending on the stage of development and it is acceptable to trade off cybersecurity against human rights.
Data protection practices must comply with international principles like the OECD 1980 one
Region should look at what GDPR mean for us and how the good principles can be adapted int he region
Tension between internet governance law and extra territorial laws
Synthesis – Town Hall 1
Content moderation – to be rooted in human rights – David Kaye report – Human rights impact assessment – social media for content moderation
Enforcement of laws – cyber crimes to get better addressing
Need for greater participation and voice of youth to be heard
Taking a human rights based approach to technology and to root ICT laws in human rights principles and values
Similarity in legislation – states should cooperate to have comparable legislation and tweak it ot local context
Network shutdowns – need to capture – in relation to disaster management and response
Privacy be design needs to be emphasized along with informed consent standards
Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum 2018 Port Vila Synthesis Document – Draft 1
Abuse and online harassment missing
Privacy and data protection are critical issues now, especially in the digital age where forms of violations are fast evolving. as they may come into conflict with freedom of expression, and can result in data-driven discrimination.
Reason: rights don’t come in conflict with each other. They have to be seen as an exercise of harmonisation. SR on FoE has many times talked about balancing rights and not confronting
After youth and women – please include while addressing privacy.
Instead of internet community – use Societies should
Suggest rephrasing the next paragrapgs as :
Societies should take a proactive approach (contributing to the efforts of regulators and legislators to strengthen online privacy and data protection), and also collaborate with agencies and organisations which are trying to combat ‘hate speech’ directed at different sections of society, especially women and minorities.
Across the Asia Pacific region, legislation has been developed to govern various aspects of the Internet. Legislation that traditionally govern offline spaces is also used in tandem with these specialised legislation to address violations. This is applicable to privacy and data protection as well. It is pertinent to emphasise the need for these laws and regulations to meet domestic constitutional as well as international human rights standards. ICT laws and privacy related regulations by state and non-state entities must place users and individuals as their priority, be rooted in, and adapt a human rights based approach. States and private entities, especially social media platforms must carry out human rights impact assessments for their existing policies and regulations on privacy and ensure that any changes or introduction of new policies undergo such assessments. States should also collaborate and adapt good practices from each other towards ensuring human rights online and privacy protection through adapting comparable legislation in the region.
I do not agree that this is a new concept – this existed in earlier forms – but i guess the point is dealing with the challenges of the new forms of data protection challenges –
Some points missing from earlier inpiut – can be captured as
Good practices and standards evolving in other jurisdictions, especially GDPR must be analysed and adapted as feasible for the region. Privacy considerations strengthened in light of GDPR may have extraterritorial enforceability. ICANN contracted parties must particularly comply with the GDPR and contractual obligations, trumping community-led policy development processes at ICANN.
Digital rights management could be explored as a significant manner in which online privacy can be protected, to this end capacity building programmes and measures must be extended through multi-stakeholder participation to empower users. Private entities, especially social media platforms play a significant role in ensuring privacy online and refraining from compromising privacy rights of users. Platforms must adapt privacy protections by design and strive for informed consent over formal gestures. As the demand for data localisation grows, these private entities must act in accordance wtih international human rights standards and states must refrain from compromising rights of individuals.
I am not sure if arguing that highest level of protection is the best way – we should ask for privacy by default and the enforcement of common minimum standards – which can then be enhanced in other jurisdictions
Suggest this to replace existing paragraph
We should talk about being aware and understanding how different groups and discriminated against and have difficulty using the internet – or accessing it – example – indigenous groups and women – LGBT groups.
Perhaps we can express that the new and emerging tech should be rights respecting – also can say we hope open source alternatives for existing and new tech keep evolving ensuring that users have autonomy and choice
Should we put dispruptive in “”
More than social systems it is a question of rights – social systems is a dicey term
Please reconsider how the last line is phrased… Even if tools benefit society, or a notion of it – it comes from a place of power- who is to decide it beefits society enough to overrule personal or individual rights
Not just civil rights – it is economic cultural and social rights that are mostly impacted – overall I suggest using human rights or mention both classes through the document.
These changes are possible only in social media platforms and internet companies, especially those that have become a part of our every day life act in a more responsible manner. Business entities must take rule of law and ensuring rights are protected in the their policies and implementation is the basis on which less intrusive regulations can be demanded from states
Would be good to include persons of all sexual orientation – this is key
Would it be possible to suggest a rights based approach to cyber security?
Also would be great if we addressed diversity in infractructure ownership which will impact who gets access
Can we change civil rights to human rights?
Suggest putting in a line that aspires for a plural internet that allows or aids individuals to develop in a manner that they deem fit for themselves
1. Network shutdowns have a series of negatie impact on human rights including the right to access, information, education, health, expression and assembly and association
2. NS are not efficient or effective solutions – they are a part of the problem.
3. Asia is the leading region on network shutdowns
4. The UN has repeatedly held that NS are not desirable – we need a call to the end for the practice on NS
Half the participants were women
We need a rights based approach to technology and regulation of technology. We hae to acknowledge that tech is not neutral and that it can harm disadvantaged communities. We thus need to have a rights based approach where we recognise the impact of different technologies including codes on people. Encourage greater multi disciplinary discussions and look at the impacts
When NS happens it means in addition to harmful content we are also shutting down essential information and content – especially for safety
I would remove and before national laws. Most of our struggle has been with national laws diluting HR guarantees. What international law provides is the bare minimum that needs to be guaranteed.
In the second line on – essential for ensuring accountability – would rephrase as placing the interest of individuals and societies at the centre of how the internet is regulated and for ensuring that our rights are secure.
The DC agreed to add this paragraph in this tense as the event had not yet completed at that time. It will be revised. Which line needs to be changed?
Suggest this be changed to 4 part – including necessity
How do you define a reasonable period of time? If that is the case, the user must also be aware that this information is safe only until a certain period.
Not sure what data-driven discrimination is discussed here… perhaps we can simplify it by saying freedom of expression, privacy and data protection need to be balanced rather than saying they come in conflict
We should highlight hate speech
Legislation and policies governing ICTs:
Across Asia several legislation have been developed to govern various aspects of the internet. Legislation that traditionally govern offline spaces are also used in tandem with these specialised legislation to address violations. These provisions must respect internationally recognised human rights and standards for restrictions. They must also draw from other regional documents on ICTs including the Budapest Convention Cyber crime.
Legislation and policies governing ICTs:
Across Asia several legislation have been developed to govern various aspects of the internet. Legislation that traditionally govern offline spaces are also used in tandem with these specialised legislation to address violations. These provisions must respect internationally recognised human rights and standards for restrictions. They must also draw from other regional documents on ICTs including the Budapest Convention Cyber crime. Particularly, states should be urged to reconsider the manner in which mutual legal assistance agreements (MLATs) are currently implemented. The right to privacy, access to justice and rule of law must be upheld when data of individuals are shared by states.
Universal protection of rights:
While expectations of privacy may vary across cultures, protection mechanisms must meet internationally guaranteed right to privacy.
Uninterrupted access to the internet is essential for the free exercise of rights online. Network shutdowns and blocking have serious economic consequences and impede the right to information, expression, assembly and association among other rights. Any disruptions to the access to mobile and internet services must comply with strict standards established in national legislation and must meet the threshold of legality, necessity and proportionality laid down in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The use of ICTs in Chennai, India in 2015/2016 during the floods for rescue efforts and for relief work
Will be good to mention the need to apply business and human rights standards to tech companies – recognising the impact these companies have on the rights and lives of individuals
Can remove what is in brackets -worried that ethics is too vague – may be we can split that sentence up
The most important thing about regulation is that they have to be rights respecting. The recent emergency ordinance on Fake news in Malaysia and Social media rules in India are cause for serious concern. Users are unable to understand what amounts to a violation and this reduces their ability to have a trusted internet and a predictable one.
Can E-learning or E-Education be discussed here?
I think trace malicious activities is not enough. Can we go further more after tracing.
I would add practical, reasonable and fair solutions
A transparent multi-stakeholder approach to identify and address key risks is a positive way forward to addressing cybersecurity issues which within the Asia Pacific region.
This sentence is manufactured oriented Machine-User. What about User-other user side line perspective?
[It is important to protect and respect the rights of users while ensuring digital security as a whole.]
My comment above!
[The key to socio-economic progress in the developing societies is quality education]
A paragraph that states clearly that APRIGF understand the need for pacific islanders equip with devices that are disaster responsive.
An important contribution of APrIGF is share free, multilingual online training programmes to marginalized communities. The network of networks would be helpful to find natural partners for translation, facilitators and more so that the end users have opportunities to learn
We need a process of accreditation for local digital literacy champions which provides a clear educational pathway for online learning
Please note the work by the Green Internet Foundation with Chris Adams who spoke at the last RIPE meeting earlier this year
Prof Safaet Hossain from City University asked how to avoid people stealing educational content to the educational panel. If we are trying to connect the Unconnected we should be encouraging all educational materials to be licenced under the Creative Commons Sharealike licences and encourage folks to use the content with the proviso that they acknowledge the source.
Correct typo of ‘intercessional’ to ‘intersessional’
If as you suggest this section should be framed from a human rights perspective, it may be better to delete this section as privacy is already mentioned under the Human Rights section. In this way, cultural differences become less contentious in terms of privacy.
The topics below may be merged or changed but I suggest that topics be clustered together to reflect various main themes. The following suggested order does not indicate that some topics are less important than others. I have started from 28 and attempted an order from there:
28, 31, 35, 33, 34, 30, 38, 36, 39, 40, 29, 32. I have omitted 37 as it’s suggested that this be merged with 31.
Please add ‘disability’ in the last sentence to read: “The application of human rights should also consider issues of gender, disability, age and sexuality.” Article 9 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities discusses the right to accessible and affordable ICT for people with disability.
Digital literacy should extend beyond learning how to use email and basic tools to safety online and to develop critical thinking to ensure that people understand what is reputable online information. Critical thinking is a key to online empowerment.
Accessibility for people with disability is a cross-cutting issue that is exemplified by the number of APrIGF sessions ie topics that were relevant. For example, apart from the specific disability session, accessibility was discussed in preparing for natural disasters, e-government services and digital literacy and taking Internet governance to the masses.
Emerging technologies such as IoT can be life-changing for people with physical disability but needs to be designed to be interoperable with various devices including assistive technologies.
Technologies should be designed to take into account the needs of the whole community including people with disability. This is done through existing international guidelines.
The concept of universal design was discussed in WS 44.
IoT and disability was raised in WS44
This issue was raised in WS 83
[Online accessibility and the availability of services online particularly for people with disabilities remain a priority. Development of content on the Internet should include accessibility as part of the agenda as such accessibility features can add to the user experience. This could be achieved with various technological developments such as voice assistants and character recognition software. More can be done to involve people actively in developing inclusive technologies and online content.]
Suggest to shorten and change above wording to:
‘Online accessibility for people with disabilities remains a priority. Inclusive design means the development of hardware and software that enhances the user experience generally and enables online content that is also accessible for people with disability. More can be done to involve people actively in developing inclusive technologies and accessible online content.’
Please add ‘disability’ after ‘age’ in the third sentence. There are over one billion people globally.
Please add ‘persons with disabilities’ in first sentence after ‘gender and religious minorities’.
There is cyberviolence against women with disabilities.
Please add ‘disability’ in third sentence after ‘gender’.
Agree. We should put emphasis on the effort in bridging and narrow the digital divide with the aim to enhance the Internet environment with higher access, empowerment and diversity, like the fundamental infrastructure and adequate and sustainable capacity building.
I totally agree with Arthit that “resilience to disaster” should not come first under the section access, but an item after basic access for the general public is achieved. Thus, it will be better and make more sense if we put it at later part.
About IDNs, in the awareness level, every party should study and explore the linguistic factors of domain names contributing to the global digital divide, how Internet domain names are managed, citing the IDN development cases in Thailand and Russia.
digital literacy goes hand in hand with digital citizenship. it is essential to safeguard one’s interests and others while expressing views on internet space. it is one’s responsibility to spread awarenance about digital citizenship in one’s circle as it may not only be harmful to that person but to others in the community too.
trust also calls for making change easier for people specifically the older generation who are most skeptical of new technology and need help with the transition from classical technology to the world of machine learning and AI.
Internet Governance normally related with the “subject and rules”, it is necessary to sort out who will be get involved in the issue and what rules will be applicable. And more ,it usually expressed by different stakeholders of the internet governance which will related with technology and public policy. Indeed the solution also will be solved by the combination of technologies and policies. In particularly, the technology is the foundation of the internet or cyberspace, and the activities of main parties、 the foundation of the policies also based on the technologies. In addition, the internet governance get the different stakeholders get involved and became globalized which is necessary to consider the factors time and pay attention to the changes in the internet governance system.
eUniversal Acceptance issue including E-mail Address Internationalization and IDNs is very Important for AP region as Next 500 million Internet users are from AP region itself.
Ascii based Internet is barrier to those who are not familiar with ASCII based languages,in getting online.A multilingual internet is useful for all so that every one can have the benefits of this marvelous technology.
We should also come together to solve issues related in to Universal Acceptance i.e. Speech to text search in local languages
Once connected to the Internet – people will use it. Mothers can sell from their homes. Builders learning new methods via Youtube. Farmers selling directly to customers. And so on.
Once connected to the Internet.
There needs to be regulation mandating open access to Internet infrastructure. So it can’t be monopolized, and ensures competition.
To be sustainable, the government need to have + enforce a strict policy against anti-competitive behaviours.
For example, in Indonesia there have been backlashes from merchants who are fed up with the high rate of commissions from platforms; which stays high, and exactly the same between platforms.
The high rate of commissions forces them to raise their prices – which in turn causes their customers to run away to their competitors.
This in turn will destroy the gig economy itself. This anti-competitive behaviours is simply unsustainable in the long run.
The keyword is indeed “collaboration”
Governments need to ensure literacy & critical thinking in the education curriculum, create laws that targets the hoax actors & their financiers (instead of the victims / consumers) – and make sure platforms’ algorithm does not amplify hoaxes/ other kind of bad contents in the name of engagement.
Civil societies need to raise awareness in people that hoax is a serious problem. It kills. It causes people to lose money. A lot of people still does not realize that this is a problem.
Once people realize this, then the ideal scenario will happen : people themselves will counter the hoax actors.
Yes, it’s field day for bad actors because there are so much personal data, even medical data, available to harvest – due to lack of IT security and Data Protection regulations.
Many people already have their private data exposed to the public.
It’s not just a theoretical scenario anymore.
A strong IT security & Data Protection regulations is simply a must.
A good IT security regulations can avoid this situation. Lack of it will cause this.
Healthcare system vendors must be held accountable to security holes in their products. Incentivized to make it better, and deterred from making compromises in term of security.
HCW (healthcare workers) and other personnels with access to healthcare systems must be trained in the topic of digital security awareness.
Deployment and usage of 2FA tokens must be a norm.
DRC and secure, automated backup; must be a norm.
We need to have a Green Computing certification scheme, such as the well-known Energy Star: https://www.energystar.gov/about
It must be robust, covering the whole spectrum of internet & computing, including datacenters and each of its components.
There are levels of its certification, such level 1 for minimum compliance, and level 5 for complete compliance.
Therefore enabling a phased approach to the ideal condition.
This is spot-on – I have been using email and mailing lists since the nineties ; yet I can’t help feeling that I’m still missing some things from time to time.
We need a structured communication facility.
A forum with threading feature, such as Hacker News, might be a good idea.
We need to realize that “freedom of expression” does not mean “freedom of amplification”
Currently, controversial contents are amplified by the platforms’ algorithm – while the balancing views are denied exposure, due to its content that’s tend to use disarming words.
This is a serious issue, an unlevel playing field.
Both sides must be given equal exposure by the platforms, not just one of them.
Whether/How Internet is defined as “Critical National Infrastructure” is different from country to country. In addition, the Internet is a cross-border infrastructure that is critical at least in a sense. So, I think it’s better to chage “Critical National Infrastructure” into “infrastructure based on the Internet”?
Vanuatu is ranked as one of the top (potential) sufferers in
WorldRiskIndex. Countries/territories in Asia/Pacific region
are among the tops as well.
Disasters are unavoidable. Internet accessibility during after
disasters is essential for the human lives. Preparation for
Natural Disasters was a well-attended session.
The above should be touched in the synthesis paper as it is
one of the very important issues in AP region.
CERT should be replaced with CSIRT since CERT is registered trademark of Carnegie Mellon University.
UN IGF also uses CSIRT (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/steapp/dpl-news-publications/un-internet-governance-forum-workshop-on-csirts-and-cyber-diplomacy)
The background part looks good，especially the 3rd paragraph.
What’s not clear to me is the purpose of this OD? What are we going to do with it? Who will be the audience or recipients? Are we going to “released” or “submit” OD to the other international arenas? How would be the relevance of OD to the future rIGF?
The 3rd paragraph shows the unbinding nature of the OD but it did not clarify the purpose.
Trade agreements address many things other than intellectual property rights. This para needs to be completely rewritten to reflect the discussion here.
I really don’t seem any reason for isolating the so-called the right to be forgotten from privacy and data protection. Is there any strong and compelling reason for so doing?
Suggest to have an overall review of the structure of the document and identify the key issues and/or topics to be covered. Apart from the current list, there are “others” (such as Manila Principles on Intermediaries, Network Neutrality and Capacity Building) that are yet to be included.
After Day 1, the fruitful discussions had been made and should be reflected in the documents.
The title is too ambiguous and should be replaced with “Emerging Issues on HR on the Internet”. This section is not a overall and comprehensive narrative on HR, instead it merely addresses a few selected issues. It’s better not to use the exclusive title as present but make it more open-ended.
“Prohibition of data localization” is indeed a poor wording and should be modified. It’s a complicated legal issue and cannot be prohibited completely. There should always be contain exemptions or exceptions that enable local storage requirements.
The global pandemic of COVID-19 highlights the essential need of e-education for both educators and students. Virtual classrooms, online distribution of teaching materials, provision of necessary software and tools and other adaptive or innovative measures require for an enabling and supporting legal environment. Those copyright rules impair e-education and other public information services should be reformed.
We may wish to clarify the meaning and definitions of couple of legal terms mentioned here. Data localization is not equal to prohibition of cross-border data flow. Protectionism is too broad and negative to be used here.
A problem concerning cybersecurity is that there is no uniform set of laws for all countries, or countries within any region, which would put up a broad framework within which all digital activities need to be performed. I think we should include the legal topics in our agenda for the year 2018-2019.
I think not just the technical community, but also the private sector companies need to be duly included in the multi-stakeholder approach. This would then entrust responsibilities and rights to the conduct of the latter.
I see, the next point says end-users also be trained on security technique methodologies. This could be best achieved if the private sector is asked to train their customers/ audience base, but on an objective note.
Here we need to keep the emerging market trends in mind. Say for instance, South Asia would be increasingly getting connected with Southeast Asia with the actualization of the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Corridor, which is now officially decided to be connected with Vietnam through Cambodia.
There could be other regions within Asia that will be connected to their respective adjacent regions in near-future.
How do you actually connect marginalized communities at a cross-border level. This needs to be very well planned, and not for the heck of saying.
Educating women, especially young girl children, on matters relating to advanced digital technologies and digital securities in crucial for empowering the whole society. There needs to be special focus in this regard, and am sure this would not be gender-discrimination but gender-empowerment.
I think we, i.e. APRIGF, its MSG group members and the organizations they are affiliated with/ head, should come up with a consensual final document of this and send it across to all national and state/ provincial governments. Also, we make a follow-up inquiring how government agencies have acted upon the shared suggestions mentioned in the doc.
I believe that maintaining cultural diversity online is an important issue, but what I want to ask is that is there any active action we can take online to keep cultures from disappearing. The internet itself is a kind of powerful and new culture, which is actually putting minor culture on the edge of extiction. So I think there should be something we can do actively.
The opening and many of the panel showed as gender is crosscutting and cannot be considered or highlighted just under the human rights section. Access to infrastructure, information, knowledge shown how the excluded are women and individuals discriminated by being gender non conforming. I would suggest a preamble acknowledge gender as a key divide and engage with substiantial strategy to practice inclusion. Innovation with no gender thinking/designing will never be really inclusive. Furthermore gender violence has to be considered non onlyy an effect of sexism, discrimination and so on but as one of the key factor that prevent women to fully access the information society.
Rtbf cannot be considered without data protection framework.
Privacy should be linked with consent and agency. Both factors have being constantly stressed during the session focusing on gender, sexual rights and freedom of expression and should be mentioned here too.
Existing process required to be reviewed and revised to ensure multi-stakeholder collaboration for developing local digital literacy champions.
We represent the voice of the youth. As we all know, the youth composes most of the internet users in this generation and that we are also the future of the internet, we hold a substantial responsibility in shaping the platform in the present for the betterment of tomorrow. And so we believe that a representative from the youth participants should be given the opportunity to partake a place in the workshop panels, and to voice out the youth perspectives regarding the themes and sub-themes that will be discussed in the forums.
How about substituting the phrase:
“The Outcomes Document aims to document” with “The Outcomes Document aims to identify” to avoid duplication of using “document”.
How about using “summarize” instead of “represent” in the first sentence? Just to avoid possible misunderstanding.
“Suggestions” instead of “Recommendations” if there is strong opposition, but otherwise, “Recommendations” is fine. This is Not a political or diplomatic document.
Using “Chair’s Summary” might be problematic – as in the process of IGF Improvement, more than Chair’s Summary, some kind of more tangible outcome document has been proposed.
Having said that, using “summary” may not a bad idea.
As we are renaming the document from “Outcomes document” to something else. Would be good to keep it consistent. How about “APrIGF Synthesis Document”? More accurate?
Best practices or ways forward
Again, an update of the process would be needed:
– 1st rough draft based on workshop submissions
– 2nd iteration from comments through the online platform & public dissemination of the link etc (from dates)
– 3rd iteration from comments (platform) & (dates)
– Final version through rough consensus
Something like this? Or based on the secretariat’s excellent summation so far already in the mailing list
from participants at the APrIGF (as well as the broader APrIGF community through remote participation and dissemination at the mailing list)
instead of project, why not “express voices, views and thoughts…”
Ya, maybe “Synthesis or Summary” document is a nice idea
The role of civil society in access issues is critical to be included. This includes research, assessments, monitoring, capacity building, impact evaluation, and creating and providing alternative infrastructure amongst many other things.
From our end in the Pacific, yes totally agreed in raising awareness so that everyone using internet will understand the threats, challenges and business opportunities that comes with the internet and at the same time aware of some proper and respectful way of using the internet platform within their respective roles.
As for me being both involved in the Government and community so its best to use both connection to make the multitakesholder approach at national level a success. Can put together Government resources and community participation to build guidelines for a safer internet for everyone in the community.
In my view Governments are the victim of the social media contents on the internet. Have been working for the government of Samoa for 20 years and have seen abuses nowadays with the introduction of social media up their game to a another level. With freedom of expression and human rights people are not afraid to put anything on the internet despite some violent contents and misleading information as they can create their own fake news that suits their agenda. There is no control on verification of any information before uploading it.
Hate speech, abusive language and misinformation is very disturbing when using these platforms. Some people tend to pour hate and fake news to stir up peace in Economies and will lead to disputes and lost of Trust to leadership. Some of the abuse have actually go beyond the limit, where it started with politics but now aims at families and children of the victims which is my BIG question is where does freedom of speech and human Rights DRAW THE LINE…Thus the RIGHTS support the Abuser who is free to make fake/hate news and disturb the peace within the community or the poor VICTIM..
There were times our Govt was tempted to block social media especially Facebook but we have recognized its important role for genuine family connection around the Globe. We can’t underestimate how the social media platform have make life easier in bringing communication and accessibility to our home and roofs and many other benefits to our daily life but we have to understand that we need to use it with respect and its not something to bring shame and hurt to other human beings.
We have moved to review our legislation’s and the government have reintroduced our criminal libel law to protect the victims from such disrespectful acts by some. The only challenge about the Act we can’t prosecute actions done from overseas but only contents that were uploaded locally.We have now in the pipeline of establishing a new Digital Transformation Authority that will oversees important changes in technology, as well as monitoring Government ICT services to meet the standard and security required. It will also through this Authority to make sure that Government critical information is protected and secure safely.
I was hoping if all countries that are now registered under the Global Internet Governance Forum can formalized a convention to safe guard the internet use. I know there is a Budapest convention for cyber crime by the Council of Europe (185). It now serves as the binding International instrument to fight against cyber crime.
It provides guidelines for any country developing comprehensive national legislation against Cybercrime and as a framework for international cooperation between State Parties to this treaty.
In saying this, we now have Non-European countries like USA, Japan and Australia as well as our neighbors Tonga who have signed and ratified the convention. I believe its a good platform for better collaboration and investigation if the perpetrator resides within these Countries or Regions.
Cybersecurity is focused on best efforts to make things more secure, without ever achieving 100% security. The goal of a truly secure Internet is an aspirational target. There needs to be increased effort on developing, implementing and revising minimum standards and good practices that address identified key risks for end users, organisations, critical infrastructure, nations and regions. This will require a multi stakeholder approach to identify and address key risks, it’s not just a problem for the network operators and IT professionals. Capacity building efforts need to consider: cybersecurity strategy and policy; cybersecurity culture and society; cybersecurity education, training and skills; legal and regulatory frameworks; and standards, organisations and technologies.
National level leadership and dedicated, ongoing funding will be required for measurable and sustainable capacity building to deliver a more secure Internet, strengthening every link in the global cyber security chain.
With the possibility of the splinternet there should be a call for island nations (governments) to invest in submarine cable infrastructure and not just leave it to the private sector. To a certain extent this improves the backhaul and the bandwidth capacity and significantly contributes to inclusion to less developeed island (provinces) but also enables redundancies to other adjacent nations making bilateral, multilateral nations better.
Could there be some sort of a neutral fact-checking website that is focused on APAC that is wikipedia-like that is led by APrIGF participants where multistakeholders can equally comment on it and yet their identities would be traceable for accountability. The results will show a spectrum of results from various perspectives not just a binary view on truth so people can be more informed. Also the results can be shareable to popular websites with understandable graphics for easy interpretation.
The current situation in the Pacific especially in Vanuatu is the lack of digital information contents, digital access, skills and information availability for various purposes that suits Vanuatu’s social and economical population. While there are now some implementation to spread access coverage, tailored information/contents for Vanuatu.
In addition, creating user/business avenues and demand-driven access to motivate more use of Internet apart from just social media, email access and sms, etc. which could encourage local, regional and international access and connections are ideal to increase access and empowerment in the pacific.
I fully agree with Kenn Yee on the multi-stakeholder and collaborative approach outreach and capacity-building efforts for internet governance.
The Pacific should get more involved in this approach as I think it will be the most suitable and working model to fit the geographical and diverse cultural existing in the pacific. And with the rapid pace and technological shift involving cloud technologies and services, the pacific needs to step up, evolve and utilise the Internet for their benefits and greater wider Asia Pacific region.
Online Privacy and Protection (or data protection) is a new concept for people in the pacific especially in Vanuatu. People in the rural areas of Vanuatu who daily use Social Media for communication generally do not know what is online privacy, data privacy/protection and even the concept of protecting personal data/information. The “value” of personal data online does not raise a concerning alarm to most end-users in the pacific. And with the unregulated nature of social media platforms, users do not take a step back to self-evaluate them on what/how their daily online presence are like.
There are several points/inputs with Cybersecurity and APrIGF:
1. I think the opening sentence/statement is very good and states well what cybersecurity in the Asia Pacific region. Highlighting the words: “…growing concern, developing economies, security measures, online economies and emerging technologies…” really expresses the need to address cybersecurity gaps with multi-stakeholders security collaboration and partnership approaches with capacity building and promoting cybersecurity especially in the Pacific.
2. This is a proposal to add to the APrIGFG 2019 sessions: more dialogue and discussion around addressing cybersecurity gaps with (1) more emphasis on security research inputs from industry research centers, academic research centers and governmental research centers, (2) innovation technologies within Cybersecurity domain, (3) law enforcement approaches, and (4) introduction of security techniques and methodologies which could help protect end-users help themselves over the internet, (5) Cyber Security standards such as ISO 27000 security Series standards, etc.
Elaborating on how law enforcement play effective role in ensuring a safe Internet environment for users, existing collaborations with law enforcement research centers and agencies have indicated working relationships with security companies, academic institutions and financial institutions. Such working partnership are indicating positive way forward to addressing cybersecurity issues which the Asia Pacific region. Hence, encouraging the Pacific region to establishing partnership with law enforcement would be a bonus to their capacity building strategies.
3. Encryption Standards and regulations. This input is more of a general input, where I am hoping to include discussion and inputs for the Asia Pacific region.
4. I am supporting other speakers and people who commented on inviting more technical people to attend and create more session. I am not sure how much relevance this would be to the whole Internet governance forum (especially around management, logistics, etc.), but including technical work shop sessions such as Security tool training, and mini cyber security challenges especially for YIGF and pacific attendees would be a capacity building suggestion.
5. Finally, my observation for the Pacific on a way forward with cyber security is to encourage effective partnership with security firms, institutions, academic institutions, law enforcement, ISPs, regulators. Finally learn from developed nations who are implementing effective cyber security strategies.
I agree with you Joyce.
This year, there is high and active youth participation in APrIGF, which reveals that the youth community in Asia-Pacific is growing robustly. Young people in this age are digital natives, therefore, it is essential for the community to include their voice in the policy-making process, and their opinions are actually beneficial for policy-making.
WS 6 is basically a workshop initiated by youth, moderated by youth and for youth. Workshop like this not only helps open a door to Internet Governance for youth, but also helps get their voice heard. In order to help widening their horizon and exposure in Internet Governance, and to include more of their opinons, it is suggested to include at least one youth speaker on every workshop, so that the youth perspectives on every topics or issues can be considered.
Social media has an increasing influence on Internet users nowadays, where we highly rely on it to receive different kinds of information, from international news to life updates of your friends. However, there are no strict rules on these social media platform, which means the reliability of this information is questionable. Corporations try to establish the community committees to review reports received regarding fraud, fake news, bullying case, etc. However, due to various factors, including gaps in capacity and knowledge, culture differences, languages, personal judgement, value, and emotion. bias is generated and the core issues in these problems are usually not addressed. Therefore, it will be appreciated if these social media platforms can adopt emerging technologies such as AI as part of this report reviewing process, which can help eliminate bias generated by humans during the decision-making process. With an auditing process in the algorithm, it is believed that it can help improve the effectiveness in resolving issues related to social media and help eliminated bias generated by AI too.
Encryption is the foundation of human right online that every Internet users deserve to have. Without encryption, we have no privacy. We have the right to express freely both physical and on the Internet, which our opinions should not be intervened or censored by any authorities or being manipulated or interpreted in a way that is beyond our initial thoughts. Therefore, it is important to ensure encryption is universally applied on the Internet, in order to protect the universal value and standards towards human rights, where the Internet can always serve as a space for us to fight for our rights even if we are experiencing unfairness in certain situations in the reality.
Fake news is a big concern during COVID-19, it is understandable for some social media platform to establish some mechanism to filter out “inaccurate” information with some fact-checking system. With the “831 Incident in Hong Kong” example raised during the Townhall session on 30 September 2020, I believe our community should pay more attention on how such enterprises are reviewing their content and how they are influenced by the government bodies of different countries. As it is another form of violation of Human Rights to filter out factually accurate content with inaccurate conclusions. This is definitely a potential risk behind the entire fact-checking mechanism, as people may abuse the system by spreading false information online on purpose to limit the dissemination of true and accurate information in any channels with a similar mechanism for whatever reason.
Participation of youth or our next generation is essential for the sustainability of the entire Internet governance community, as well as the discussion of different Internet issues. It is always easy to say “we should encourage youth to participate”, but in reality, youth being unaware of Internet governance is not always the case. There are you in the community, but a sustainable way for meaningful participation is lacking.
A discussion in the Asia Pacific Youth IGF 2022 highlighted factors that hinder the inclusion of new voices, such as lacking support, gaps in the structure of the Internet governance ecosystem, as well as language barriers, and suggested how the youth community and other stakeholders could and should do to encourage sustainable meaningful participation from our next generation.
Youth is contributing with a limited capacity. The key is how our regional discussion and community includes their voice. For example, the youth from the Asia Pacific Youth is discussing and put together a youth statement with their outcomes on different Internet governance issues and working hard on keeping young people in our community. But is our regional discussion and community inclusive enough, in terms of structure and opportunities, to recognize their contribution, and reflect their opinions.
APrIGF is by far a pretty welcoming platform for new voices. However, the sustainability of youth participation has always been a challenge. There are fellowship programs that support newcomers, but there isn’t enough support or a clear pathway for them to evolve into different roles in our community.
For example, joining the MSG and taking up roles to stay involved and contribute to the community is one of the many ways to continue their engagement. But is the existing environment inclusive enough? Not only the nature or design of how things are done in a working group or community but for example, the methods of communications. Is it effective or easy enough for new members to follow?
The existing format we adopted for communication, for instance, is using a mailing list and sending hundreds of emails back and forth to get one issue discussed or tasks completed. Newcomers might be interested to participating in all these processes and actually being capable to contribute. But a relatively unorganized way of communication might hinder or even discourage newcomers to understand, follow or even contribute to such a meaningful initiative or community.
According to a session at the Asia Pacific Youth IGF 2022, it is agreed that collaboration is the key to youth engagement and developing digital citizenship. Collaboration among youth initiatives is needed, in order to create synergies to ensure the youth’s opinions will be reflected as much as we can in different levels of discussion in the Internet governance community.
In order to develop local digital literacy, support from local organizations or collaborations is needed, as those outreach works are mostly contextual, and local languages and cultures usually have a great influence on capacity building.
The cyber-world is a rapidly changing environment. It is a fact that information can be disseminated in just one click with nearly no cost. Mitigating dis/misinformation on social media is a must, but given that social media is a privately-owned public space that is hosting a virtual community, content moderation, particularly on dis/misinformation must not be done by the platform or service provider solely. Instead, a community-based solution has to be proposed.
Certainly, we can always improve the algorithms to “filter” the information that is inaccurate or false to tackle the issues of dis/misinformation. However, the transparency of practice must be ensured with the participation of the community, as this could balance out the chances of the mechanism being abused and used for censorship.
Meanwhile, a community-based fact-checking mechanism should be developed and the empowerment of the general public in identifying the truthfulness or accuracy of information should not be neglected.
I wonder whether you want to add “including open Wi-Fi” to indicate the value of allowing open networks without a login or registration requirement? I did talk about this in the Core Internet Values workshop.
I’m also a little confused and concerned about what this might mean.
Overall comment: the synthesis document is rather light on content and heavy on generalities. But this is not necessarily a fatal criticism. I acknowledge that there is some value in beginning with a very high-level, general document while we are kicking the tires of this process.
Youth-driven initiatives have been mentioned in this paragraph. Adding a section on the discussion outcomes of the YIGF role-play session from each of the three committees that have been formed after the final round-table discussion on the final day.
I think this paragraph is simply restating the sub themes of the conference. The other topics listed may have been discussed but they shouldnot be considered sub themes.
Kindly include entry re PWD and accessibilities.
This I think should be lifted from here. It actually covers all the sections, from access, security, digital economy, to human rights.
CERTs will play a key role in monitoring behavior of activities and providing advisories and they need to mentioned.
The Prime Minister mentioned about money laundering and especially people with such intentions are using the Pacific as their safe havens to carry out such an act. As such, we need to look at security developments in terms of internet technologies that will 1) prevent such acts from being committed and 2) if they are committed, tracing of such activities including powers to enforce full force of the law across borders.
Cross-border data flow should increase to facilitate for efficient trade between countries. Laws of the land should be given priority over introduce or foreign laws.
How do we know that applications that are developed satisfy the needs of all users of the app? If we do not have that access at the very beginning, then we would not have known the answer now. But it is more important that we build that into the very core of our education system so that youths are empowered knowledge and information as they walk out of college. It would be a little bit of a challenge for those that never made it to the elementary schools. But the vocational training centres should be able to bridge the gap.
The basic method of Internet connectivity is now Wi-Fi.
Some Asia-Pacific countries prohibit private companies from operating Wi-Fi hotspots, restricting this activity to incumbent telecommunications operators.
Bridging the Digital Divide depends on free and open access for all people and companies to the radio spectrum that Wi-Fi relies on.
Frequency and spectrum are interchangeable terms. I suggest the sentence read either:
“Open access to WiFi frequencies is increasingly important”
“Open access to WiFi spectrum is increasingly important”
Libraries in some Asia Pacific economies face regulatory hurdles when providing community Internet Access. These can include a:
1.) a telecommunications license, or dispensation from a licensing regime.
2.) a requirement to filter Internet content provided through the network
3.) a requirement to provide interception capabilities for police / government
4.) a requirement to block Voice over IP technologies including Skype in economies where voice services can only be provided by licensed carriers
An Asia-Pacific strategy for Community networks and public access to ICT should acknowledge these regulatory hurdles and promote their harmonisation or elimination as a step towards ensuring Universal Access.
Telecommunications licensing requirements are a major barrier to connecting the unconnected in developing Asia. Activities such as setting up a community Wi-Fi network are prohibited or made difficult in many economies by regulation, process, and corruption.
True progress in this area cannot be made until telecommunications regulations in developing nations are relaxed to allow communities and their technical partners to innovate.
This group would do well to produce a document summarising regulatory barriers to community networks on a country-by-country basis to highlight the problem and pursue it at a regional level.
We say “strategies must be developed” but in fact the ITU & World Bank InfoDev already have excellent strategies published in their ICT Regulation Toolkit. Should we instead seek to update or promote their work?
“In the case of 5G, network slicing may likely fragment the Internet.”
Network slicing is the concept of running multiple logical networks on a common radio access infrastructure. It’s main purpose is to allow 5G infrastructure to be shared between Internet access, industrial control functions, SCADA for utilities, telemetry for self-driving vehicles, IoT sensor networks, and other critical infrastructure applications that do not belong on Internet-connected networks. GSMA provides a complete definition here: https://www.gsma.com/futurenetworks/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/GSMA-An-Introduction-to-Network-Slicing.pdf
There are few if any valid concerns about network slicing fragmenting the Internet.
“Universal Acceptance (UA) is a fundamental requirement for a truly multilingual and digitally inclusive Internet” – however this very website and feedback form does not accept my email address at the domain tō.nz as being valid.
Wrong spelling of “Foot notes”.
Replace “Foot notes:” with “Footnotes:”
In addition to providing access to the internet to more people, we also need to make sure that the internet provides a safe space for minority groups and vulnerable communities. There are at least two issues when it comes to the internet: the monolingualism of it and the lack of content that provides affirmations for minorities and marginalized communities. Therefore, I believe it is important to also think of how we can empower minorities and marginalized communities to populate the internet with native contents by and for the community and to build a safe space so they can not only use, but also thrive on the internet.
To include another section dedicated to activities around capacity building on Internet Governance such as newcomers capacity building day, and encouraging APAC participation in IG issues.
Need to push for enforcement of law both on and offline, particularly at national level;
To mitigate security concerns and cybercrime, there is an urgency to develop robust cybersecurity policies at organisational and national levels.
Need further elaboration on role of law enforcement and more guidance for them on balancing individual privacy rights while ensuring public safety.
Need language on the need for more capacity development activities to increase knowledge and capabilities of technical operators.
Some issues raised at Townhall:
– Digital citizenship and importance of digital literacy
– Accountability and transparency of (big) platforms, governments, and stakeholders
– Role of governments and private sector (such as media) in the spread of misinformation and erosion of online trust
– Collaboration and cooperation in cybersecurity “all hands on deck”
With new, emerging technologies, and the state of current geopolitics, the risk of Internet fragmentation is increasing. Fragmentation will disrupts people’s ability to access the Internet in a seamless way. It will also lead to a loss in innovation – one of the benefits of the global, interoperable Internet.
There were some good recommendations for inclusion – financial inclusion – in the Opening Plenary. Would be good to add some lines reflecting the discussion from there.
There was good discussion in the Day 0 session around healthy skepticism of the use of AI. Worth including some notes from that session in this section.
The impact of cyber attacks on hospitals/healthcare sector/systems is profoundly human.
Establishment of not only national but also industry or sector-specific CERTs can help these critical sectors to mitigate attacks and recover from incidents.
why is it conflict to each other?
Can we say ‘appropriate level of protection which meets international standard should be’…..
Also, we may add what should be done e.g. incorporating social norm + laws + tech is needed to address the problem?
Human Rights online should just not limit what we can do in the internet, but it should not be ignored as well. I think the Human Rights online should be its own thing, it should be redefined, privacy offline is not necessarily what is online, free speech offline is not necessarily what it should be online. There is a difference and as such defined differently. It is an interesting topic, it should be highlighted but its definition should be clarified. Human Rights was not defined in a day. The existing one may not at all apply online.
With the internet being this ever-evolving entity, human rights on the internet should be ever-evolving as well. We should move forward and see the internet as it is and as it will be with rights ever changing and not as something set in stone.
APrIGF 2021 – Hyderabad Local Hub
The Hyderabad Local Hub of Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum, APRIGF 2021, Asia was conducted in Hybrid mode at Surana Auditorium, Federation of Telangana Chambers of Commerce & Industry (FTCCI).
In the first part of the program, Opening Plenary was witnessed online from the Auditorium by participants and in online mode. After the introductory remarks by MSG Chair, YIGF representative and UN IGF Programme and Technology manager, Secretary MCIST, Nepal inaugurated the APRIGF. In his address he highlighted the various initiatives of Government of Nepal for Internet access including the Digital literacy program. He urged on the need of interaction among various stakeholders to work on development of Internet Governance.
The first panel session –Covid-19: Internet as a Lifeline highlighted the various issues related to Internet Governance during COVID-19. Some of the key points discussed during the Panel discussion were: In addition to the physical connectivity, the services accessibility, usability and privacy are the important issues. Though the use of internet has exponentially increased during Covid-19 including tele-consultations, online education, online transactions etc but it has also created new challenges w.r.t breaching of personal information, increase of frauds etc. The panelist urged the Governments should initiate IT & Technology education at school level, address the privacy issues and provide connectivity support to all citizens.
Inauguration of APrIGF- Hyderabad Local Hub Launching:
The IGF-Hyderabad Local Hub was inaugurated during the event. Dr. N J Rajaram in his initial remarks stated that we need sustainable, inclusive and trusted internet which has the features namely affordability, accessibility, realism and relevance. MS Khyati Naravane, CEO, FTCCI in her opening remarks congratulated on the inauguration of Hyderabad Local Hub and highlighted the activities of FTCCI.
The IGF Hyderabad Local Hub was inaugurated by Mr.Jayesh Ranjan, Principal Secretary, IT and industries, Govt of Telangana. In his address, he highlighted about the disruptions that happened due to COVID and urged the readiness towards more and more digitization. He also raised the concerns about dealing with Digital Divide in a better way. Further he discussed the need to deal with online frauds and internet crimes as they were increased during these tough times. Giving his best wishes to the Hyderabad local hub he reiterated that the Government of Telangana would like to partner and participate in the activities of Internet Governance to address the issues highlighted. Mr. K . Bhaskar Reddy in his Presidential address complemented ISOC India, Hyderabad chapter for taking initiatives towards Internet Governance. He urged the need of constant interaction between the Government and stakeholders to address the issues of Internet.
Mr. K Mohan Raidu, President Internet Society India, Hyderabad Chapter listed various working groups that works towards addressing risk and challenges of Internet. In his address, he highlighted various initiatives of the chapter towards dealing with the challenges faced. He discussed about the Community project to reach to rural areas. He said that ISOC Hyderabad will initiate the activities of collecting mobile devices that are unused by the people so as to help the needy. He also highlighted the initiatives of Universal Acceptance (UA) for multilingual internet.
Mr. Bala Prasad Peddigari, Secretary, ISOC Hyderabad Proposed vote of thanks.
After the inauguration of local hub, the participants connected to the Round table discussion on “Impact of Digitization on Climate Change” where the speakers highlighted few of the important issues like better utilization of internet traffic based on various internet traffic patterns and addressing the issue of reducing the power consumption of various devices using the internet even in the idle state. The key take away of the round table discussion was “rather than only thinking about how many bits are transferred there is also a need to estimate the equivalent power consumption”. The next session on “Transnational conversations on reclaiming freedom of expression online” discussed on issues pertaining to gender and other types of discrimination on internet. The panel was of the opinion that freedom of expression cannot be violated in the name of censoring the content. The discussion ended with a note that “There is a need to get the law makers and all stake holders to reduce the discrimination on internet”.
In the valedictory function, Dr. Salman Abdul Moiz, Vice President ISOC Hyderabad summarized the deliberations happened during the day and urged the participants to come forward in realizing various initiatives of ISOC. The session ended with words of thanks and networking over the lunch. The event was supported by FTCCI and Aurora Technological Research Institute.
We need to identify who has been affected by the digitization processes, and how. For example, whose land is being used to build internet infrastructure such as data centers. And who will build those infrastructures? Who are the laborers behind the digital industry? If they are migrants, or indigenous peoples, how do we integrate them in the internet ecosystem? Could we consider them as a part of the internet ecosystem?
We also need to think about an efficient e-waste management system, and how to improve the working conditions of waste pickers who are informal workers and take the risk of prolonged exposure to toxic substances.
I think the discussion on gig economy in APrIGF this time lacked authentic voices from platform workers. We do not really know what a real challenge for them is, and what they exactly need from related stakeholders. In addition, I think this issue is challenging as their working conditions are different depending on the existing labor protection laws as well as the strength of labour unions in different countries. In the context of my country, Thailand, food delivery drivers and platform drivers, particularly old drivers, has a low digital literacy. Some of taxi drivers have unintentionally started using application to find their customers because young customers have changed their way to ask for taxi services.
To make a more fair and sustainable digital economy, voices of platform workers need to be heard, and they need to be visible in regional and global meetings such as APrIGF. We need an inclusive solution to close the digital divide and make economic activities more sustainable.
One of the speakers raised the issue about the import of surveillance technology such as Pegasus spyware by the government to monitor activists and opposition parties rather than to use for national security reason. In this regard, apart from privacy law in each country and region, the human rights due diligence framework need to be applied with tech companies as we need more transparent in purchasing and selling of surveillance technology. In addition, parliamentarians need to examine the use of state budget in purchasing of digital technology to tackle terrorism and/or protect the nation. Although some governments might argue that such technology is used for security purpose, in reality, it would be used for stealing personal data of ordinary citizens.
It is great to see more youth participating in APrIGF. But I would like to encourage this community to use intersectionality lens to think about young representatives. It is not just about age, but also their ethnicity, gender, (dis)ability, educational background and religious/belief etc. For example, how do we encourage young LGBT people from ethnic minority to join as a fellow? Is it possible for young people who are a platform worker and have a low level of education to participate in APrIGF? In this regard, I think we need to start from the local level – to empower those people to be prepared to talk about their issues in the regional and global level.
In addition, is it possible for APrIGF organizers to provide translators for participants who are not fluent in English? I have been engaging in APrIGF since 2018 and found that there are only a few fellows/youths from my country joining this event. One of the main reasons is that speaking English, particularly in the public, is not easy for them. Even some of them have public speaking skills, but not for English language.
I think what is lacking in APrIGF is the equal power relation between stakeholder groups. In particular, in each session, I did not see the diversity among speakers (at least in the sessions I attended) – many of them are from the same stakeholder groups. The sessions that talked about digital rights and disinformation, I did not hear voice from government/lawmakers. How do they work to improve digital rights? And what approach do they work to regulate the Internet? I would like to see more constructive dialogues among CSOs, private sector, tech community, and government in sessions in APrIGF. How can we make APrIGF to be a safe space for discussions for all stakeholder groups?
combined efforts from multi community sake holders or internet users or internet consumers safe guarders is needed. rather than private public etc
effort necessary to support skill development , local languages local Ideas thoughts
collaboration on cyber security education and preventing cyber attacks from nations which will effect people countries innocents etc.
Rural users villages un educated users.
ecological social survival economical
under global united open nations / open data flow liberty of cross border of open knowledge’s must be safe guarded with open agreement and policy/
social ,economical, native people societies , under privileged societies , middle class societies un educated job less youth etc
Note globally middle class is getting sandwiched the next billion are also form these communities or youth of world is also can be added.
investigation prosecution open collaboration
tracing cyber crooks with out double minds / standards.
Education and open privacy to cultures under universal open standards rules and regulations can over come culture where in good privacy is needed in known , others privacy is becoming others business mud throwing for survival etc,.
If culture is aspect no body in world must not watch movies tv shoes etc
Governments service providers internet companies must respect consumer rights and also quality if living liberty of internet is important.
right to destroy of digital personal data secured knowledge of people is important. good people data is not worried by criminals data must not be forgotten.
Dear one and all
This is kanumuri s Raju from India. In order to make internet safe , make every internet user rights needs in place we must act on these
1) educate all internet users how to use it , safe gaurdimg their privacy face cyber attacks as most of them are uneducated.
2 ) no junk data in internet web sites
,3) eastablish skill centers .
4)! No fake news based on
) Act on people missing .
6} collobiration open partner ships
7)saving eco system / electronics recycling
8) make governece important
9) qos important. Localization imp.
Green Greetings from DAV College Amritsar, Punjab, India !
We at DAV College Amritsar, believe in equality , inclusiveness and value driven Internet framework for next billion internet user in Asia Pacific. We strongly believe ICT based deliberation and ideation help sustain Human Rights in digital era. We also believe trust can be achieved by incorporating balance between Basic Human Right and Security and privacy on Internet ecosystem . We never advocate hate speech and fake news in order to have more responsible behavior for end user.
One World One Internet !
In my view right to fundamental speech needs to review in the context of freedom of expression. We do need comprehensive framework to address theses issues.
When it comes to improving access to Internet, one of the biggest hurdles is digital divide. Even if the Internet is taken to their door step, digital illiterate (or even uneducated ones) gets left out from the inclusion. So the strategies must be also focused on helping/supporting those people who are first time ICT users. For example, community centers with Internet facilities can be setup within the community and the operators can support those people.
When more and more focus is geared towards IPv6 adoption, it is also equally important to make such adoption affordable. Else those users who can not make the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 will be impacted, and consequently, for giving access to the next billion users, the old users will be sidelined.
In the workshop session – public access of ICT, there was greater emphasis to develop more local contents to diversify the Internet resources, which will enable easy access to non-English speaking users.
[Privacy and data protection]
When it comes to security, privacy and data protection, the policy makers are confronted with the balancing act of CIA framework, which emphasize on “Confidentiality”, “Integrity” and Availability. It is always challenge to sufficiently protect the data, but also making easily available to intended users. So it again drives down to policy decision of providing appropriate balance between “restricting access” and “granting access”.
Not sure about using content in a plural form (contents) here.
Indeed, digital literacy is critical. Particularly in regions that are newly connected.
Use of words “multi stakeholder” here. Can be consistent with rest of document which spell it as “multistakeholder”.
Ensuring that the Internet does not replicate existing inequalities is something mentioned in the community networks session. For example in an area with good connectivity, men still have more access than women or the wealthy more so than the poor.
Have to develop contents in accessible formats
And localizd contents
Participants shared their experiences of inadvertently allowing a checkmark to be clicked when they did not mean to, allowing their email to be subscribed to multiple newsletters seeking to sell them something. Also noted this happens in real life, not just in online world. For both, the practice may be legal, but it is not honest. It is not trustworthy. One participant recommended applying AI and ML to a browser to catch deceptive design- the question for the day is how to not just counter bad practices, but how to encourage and empower good practices? What do trusted design and trusted design guidelines look like?
To get all inclusive environment, we must need to deal with every stakeholders in each countries. Since there is a lot of differences between between not only rural and urban areas but also between Developing countries and Developed countries. To affordable internet, government need to deal with ISPs to get the access cheap and affordable for all and great connection. To fullfil the digital knowledge, events like APrIGF and yIGF and the others more need to support the local and Regional events.
There are still violations of rights in Asia Pacific regions not only from online but also at the ground situations. To protect our rights, we need to express our feelings, our thoughts via using social media to give awareness. And by the rule of laws, although we can cover with it, but the rules must need to protect the freedom of expressions and rights, not to violate it.
As lawmakers move to clamp down on deceptive design practices, we also need to build guidelines and benchmarks for what trusted design looks like as part of a wider shift towards an environment where platforms design their services in a way that puts users in control and where trust becomes a norm. We need to create a culture where trust and long-term relationships are highly valued and where companies that lean on deceptive design practices are made to pay, as empowered customers leave and investors refocus on competitors that meet their expectations around ESG and ethical technology.
Building the principles, best practices, and regulatory guidance that can shape this environment demands input from a wide spectrum of specialists, from designers and product managers to academics and advocates, and experts already leading the way on regulation.
This is a very interesting point-of-view, because there is actually a community and project dedicated to digital accessibility called a11ty. It is a community-driven effort to make digital accessibility easier.
As an aspiring developer myself, I think that at the heart of building a more accessible online community are the ones that build the platforms themselves. Therefore, I believe pushing for a more accessibility-driven development and design to the point that it’s mainstreamed for a truly inclusive internet would cascade into a more accessible online community. This of course, applies to all fields: cloud, web, mobile, IoT, AI, ML, VR, Blockchain, etc.
This can be accomplished through a lot of ways, one of which I can think of is through incentivizing ideathons and hackathons centered on a11ty paired with active involvement in the internet governance space. As I mentioned, I think there are more ways to go about this, but these are my thoughts regarding the topic.
RTBF Meeting on Day 2 (July 28) from 9:00am in Room 405
Definitely agree with your statement Joyce
Basic elements of Internet Governance should be introduced in schools together with other computer-related curricula, particularly in the Pacific. Many young people don’t understand what the Internet actually is let alone how its governance is managed. Teaching young people how the Internet actually came about and how it continues to be run today should be a precursor to teaching them how to use a computer and access the Internet.
Just a suggestion, this comment might be better captured under Access and Empowerment section
Suggestion for addition after “resources and support that help to empower access need to be considered”: , crafting a policy framework based on best practices for accessibility as a norm for developers to follow.
Instead of “better and effective policies”, suggestion to specify what the goals of such policies are.
Suggested text: The Internet is a global open platform, and policies should effectively pursue this;
Internet shutdowns are a huge disruption to a nation’s economy and society regardless of the length of the shutdown and whatever the motivations . National and local authorities need to be informed that such shutdowns are ineffective in addressing public unrest or other issues, and large economic costs are unnecessarily incurred.
Alongside the goal of inclusion, consideration needs to be given for safeguards to ensure the well-being of vulnerable groups, such as children, in their usage of the Internet. These safeguards should be crafted with the interests of vulnerable groups in mind, to ensure that they are protected from Internet-related dangers and inappropriate content.
As an alternative to data localisation and data protectionist policies, procedures to define provisions for data access should be discussed and developed via a multistakeholder approach.
Outreach and capacity-building efforts for Internet governance, whether local or regional, should also follow a multistakeholder and collaborative approach towards a shared goal of bolstering the community.
I represent as one of the voices of the youth. Based on the Townhall Session held on July 18, 2019, me and my fellow youth participants from YIGF 2019 suggested implementing a “youth section” for the synthesis document from hereon. Knowing that the youth comprises of the majority of internet users online, especially on social media platforms, we would like to extend our help and participate more in these synthesis documents beyond what is expected of us. A large portion of the youth has broad access to the latest trends with the internet, so giving them the opportunity to voice out their opinions into a dedicated section where their thoughts will be focused upon. The youth playing a bigger role in both the multi-stakeholder model and the synthesis document is crucial when highlighting their important perspectives regarding the numerous issues with internet governance.
We held a workshop on the protection of youth online. I know there were several workshops regarding the similar theme. Therefore, we believe that we should include several sentences on the protection of youth online specifically. In this regard, I would like to propose the following sentences.
“While the freedom of expression based on the free flow of information shall be respected, protecting children from illegal and harmful online contents is one of the most important issues. Accordingly, it is vital for all multistakeholders including governments, private sectors, schools, and child welfare institutions to cooperate and collaborate each other in order to strike a balance between the freedom of expression and the protection of youth online. In addition, comprehensive approaches based on national and international laws as well as self-regulations are indispensable, taking into account cultural, historical, and social differences of countries and regions.”
We would like to propose the following paragraph to be provided after para. 16 “II. Security”.
17. It is paramount to foster Internet freedom and ensure a safer Internet environment for all. Particular attention should be paid to address rapidly increasing challenges to protect youth online. The enhancement of ICT literacy of youth is important, but the protection of youth from illegal and harmful online contents is also indispensable not only for the Asia-Pacific region. All stakeholders including, but not limited to governments, private sector, civil society, the technical community, and international organizations should cooperate and collaborate each other in adopting regulatory, self-regulatory, and other effective policies and frameworks to protect children and young people from abuse and exploitation through ICTs, while upholding the freedom of expression online guaranteed by the free flow of information.
Thank you so much, Paul and Wanawit. I would like to propose to replace with the following (but with brackets):
Digital economy and trade are key enablers for the development of the world economy, yet they severely challenge traditional national [borders][jurisdictions]. Now that the digital economy has becomes the economy as such, it does not have any borders. The digital economy and trade cannot be successful without the free flow of information and appropriate domestic and global rules. On the other hand, there is a growing trend that some governments take protectionist approaches on trade by limiting the free flow of information and/or requiring data localization, and the trend hinders the further growth of the world economy. Therefore, constructing the further network of free trade agreements which requires member states to maintain the free flow of information and to ensure the prohibition of data localization as well as source code disclosure unless there is a legitimate public policy reason is recommended. In this regard, close collaboration and thorough discussion among governments, private sector, civil society, the technical community, and international organizations are indispensable.
Taking into account all the above proposals, I would like to propose the following text:
28. V. Multistakeholder Approach
The multi-stakeholder approach to Internet governance, which includes full and active participation by all stakeholders including, but not limited to governments, private sector, civil society, the technical community, and international organizations, has been continuously and widely supported by all the stakeholders. This approach should be the basis of domestic and international policy making processes and initiatives which are inclusive, transparent and accountable to all the stakeholders in the world. All the stakeholders should be equal to get involved in the discussion of the Internet governance.
We would appreciate if you could add the following sentences in para.30, Security:
“While recalling the freedom of expression online based on the free flow of information not only domestically but also internationally, the protection of youth from illegal and harmful online contents is one of the most important issues in the Internet governance. Hence, it is vital for all multistakeholders including, but not limited to governments, private sectors, schools, and child welfare institutions to cooperate and collaborate each other in order to strike a balance between the freedom of expression and the protection of youth online. In this regard, comprehensive approaches based on national and international laws as well as self-regulations by private sectors are indispensable, taking into account cultural, historical, and social differences of countries and regions.”
While I would like to echo what Ms. Hong Xue said, provisions on digital economy and trade are absolutely needed. In addition, there are many kinds of international agreements and policies, so we had better change the title otherwise this paragraph is bit vague and it is unclear what this paragraph wants to say.
Therefore, I propose the following sentences:
¶32 (or appropriate para. number) Digital Economy and Trade
Digital economy and trade are key enablers for the development of the world economy. Now that the digital economy becomes the economy as such, and does not have any borders. The digital economy and trade cannot be successful without the free flow of information and appropriate domestic and global rules. On the other hand, there is a growing trend that some governments take protectionist approaches on trade by limiting the free flow of information and/or requiring data localization, and the trend hinders the further growth of the world economy. Therefore, constructing the further network of free trade agreements which requires member states to maintain the free flow of information and to ensure the prohibition of data localization as well as source code disclosure unless there is a legitimate public policy reason is highly recommended. In this regard, thorough discussion among not only governments, but also other multistakeholders is encouraged by referring to Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement as one of the examples.
We should discuss to give sense of ownership to the communities. Support them to create their own Internet or local network infrastructure and let them help within themselves. Communities helping to the communities. People tend to be protective and caring towards their own properties.
There are number of ways to provide a low cost access to the rural areas where major ISPs consider it not profitable. And they also offer net neutrality through that network infrastructure (e.g. community network). We should raise awareness to the government and locals. It is time to try bottom-up approach rather than top-down approach
We should not only depend on the government to do the things for us. It takes time. I think people help themselves to create their own infrastructure.
Agree with you. There is no use of creating an infrastructure if there are noone to use it.
[Access and empowerment]
While providing an access to the rural areas, empowering local people to benefit from the Internet is one of the most important thing. Creating a business opportunities through Internet, periodical education programs, practical workshops are must!
Also, age gap of Internet users should be considered more. Because some areas younger people are more interested of using the Internet, but what about middle aged and older people? How are they going to benefit?
Cyber Connectivity sounds not clear to me. Also “Merghing Physical Spcae with …” and “bring next billion online” well addressed the importance of connectivity.
What is new in this paragraph?
[Q] Is this about what we used to call “universal access”?
would it be fair to mention a certain bill of certain country in this document?
“The so-called concept of Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) is gaining greater support in many countries. Should RTBF have extra-territorial application? Does it also apply to digitised newspaper archives? Where do the boundaries lie with freedom of the press, and the integrity of the historical record? RTBF is a legal device supposed to protect privacy but it delists according to others concepts like public interest, and it is dangerous because it imposes a burden of proving public interest on people searching for public truthful statements or intermediaries (such as libraries, educational institutions, archives, search engines).”
“The so-called concept of Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) is gaining support in some jurisdictions. Should RTBF have extra-territorial application? Does it also apply to digitised newspaper archives? Where do the boundaries lie with freedom of the press, and the integrity of the historical record? More fundamentally, the mostly judge-made law delists according to concepts like public interest but it conflicts with public interest because it imposes a burden of proving public interest on people searching for public truthful statements or intermediaries (such as libraries, educational institutions, archives, search engines).”
“The so-called concept of Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) is gaining support in some jurisdictions. Should RTBF have extra-territorial application? Does it also apply to digitised newspaper archives? Where do the boundaries lie with freedom of the press, and the integrity of the historical record? However, more fundamentally, the mostly judge-made law orders delisting according to concepts like public interest but it conflicts with free access to information and therefore public interest because it imposes a burden of proving public interest on people searching for public truthful statements or intermediaries (such as libraries, educational institutions, archives, search engines).”
“The so-called concept of Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) is gaining support in some jurisdictions. Should RTBF have extra-territorial application? Does it also apply to digitised newspaper archives? Where do the boundaries lie with freedom of the press, and the integrity of the historical record? More fundamentally, the judicial decisions under that concept conflict with public interest because it imposes a burden of proving public interest on people searching for public truthful statements or intermediaries facilitating that search such as libraries, educational institutions, archives, search engines.” – Winston, Yasuo (of IFLA); K.S., Kelly (Open Net Korea)
Sorry for multiple comments above, which kinda reflect collective stream of consciousness of the working group. Please use the last one signed with the names of all of us (clocked at 7:07am). Also, I think Arthit’s comment is consistent with and incorporatable into our proposed text.
“suggests competing public interest” sounds too weak in pointing out the problem. how about “Moreover, emerging jurisprudence is problematice because it imposes a burden. . . .”?
Right to be Forgotten is not very welcomed in Asia for a reason. There are many former colonies and dictatorships which until recently have not resolved the past injustices or oppressions that still stand as structural roadblocks in the paths to equality and democracy. In addressing those structures, we need to see the whole truth, not partial truth. Not truth just about public figures, not truth only about high level officials who collaborate with dictatorships or colonial administrations. Not just truth ordained by some offical history books issued by the governments. Not just truths approved through majoritarian decisionmaking as suitable for public discussion. Truth can only be approached only when having all voices heard including subjective ones.
Proponents of Right to be Forgotten offer that it does not apply to public figure, but sometimes you need more information to decide whether someone is public figure or not. If the information is delisted, you really cannot make that determination properly.
Moreover, people who in the past were not public personas, may become public figures in the future. Then their past may matter.
People have collective right to know the wrongs of not just others, or even themselves. Collective right to observe, evaluate, and retain what they see in one another. So that they do stand as responsible colleagues to one another and keep themselves from repeating the wrongs. This is how the ethics of a society are done: by learning from the past. Publicness is exactly the space for collective learning.
There are already many laws in Asian countries that interfere with such communal learning by suppressing even truthful information. For instance, in Korea, we have a truth defamation law where even information not proven to be false can subject to criminal prosecution merely for lowering another person’s reputation. We cannot have another principle such as RTBF that undermine our publicness.
RTBF, currently framed, also constitutes administrative censorship. Non-judicial administrative body, namely data protection agencies, are empowered to order search engines to manipulate search results. Administrative censorship has been abused deeply and widely in Asia for blinding people from truths inconvenient to the authorities, as you could see in recent internet shutdowns in South Asia. The danger of administrative censorship is that lawful information can be taken down due to progovernment bias can dilute those decisions. Also, the subject of orders are likely to challenge the decision even if there is a judicial review process because the government can always retaliate even just for challenging it.
Some people like to believe that data protection authorities are different from other organizations that have conducted censorship but I do not see it that way. I already see the evidence that in Peru, other Latin American countries where DPA is really playing the role of censorship. And in Korea, the dangers are also being played out. Internet censorship is not taking down unlawful content, but taking down unethical content and what is ethical is decided by these nine Korean males in their 50s and 60s and nobody can really get a consistent principle out of that. This only goes to show the dangers of DPA authorized to take down truthful public information for the pretext of RTBF.
Joint Statement of the Dynamic Coalition on Publicness Concerning the Right to Be Forgotten
The public realm is losing ground. New regulation and jurisprudence are being conceived to address conflicts concerning the digital dimension of the public space and our ability, as Internet users, to reflect on ourselves. One of them is the so-called “right to be forgotten” (RTBF). The version originally formulated and popularized by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) is now being adopted in other regions and with slightly different manifestations including both the right to delist and the right to delete content.
The underlying motive behind the idea of the RTBF is people’s fear of being discriminated against for their past conduct. If this is the case, we need to recognize that blinding ourselves from one another’s wrongs (or supposed wrongs) is not an effective way of addressing and combating unreasonable discrimination. Under current rulings, the supposed wrongdoers can censor search results about themselves just because they think that certain past conduct is currently irrelevant to the moral evaluation of their character by others. Such self-centered censorship will prohibit people from confronting the real forces that are fanning such discrimination. Discrimination can only be addressed when the problems and its causes are known to society.
Furthermore, blinding ourselves to information about others’ conduct is not a proportionate way of combating discrimination. Information that the supposed wrongdoers would like to bury deep within the Internet may be vital for the safety of the people who have pending encounters with the individual in question. Suppressing certain truthful information may be necessary to guard against a high likelihood of immediate discrimination, as in the case of former sex workers or sex abuse victims in certain cultures, but such likelihood must be measured against objective criteria not simply against subjective reputational wishes of the supposed wrongdoers. A viable legal provision against discrimination is possible and in many legislations already existent: either in ex ante forms, such as amnesties or expungement provisions, or in ex post forms protecting other personal rights, such as defamation. RTBF goes beyond that by restricting people trying to protect themselves from sharing vital information. A more effective and proportionate remedy against discrimination is allowing more information to be made available about people so that others’ perceptions of them can be properly contextualized.
Simply put, information is not the reason for discrimination, but prejudice. Prejudice is not based on information, but on the moral decision to do harm by misusing information. We should combat discrimination, not information.
RTBF depends on the temporal relevance of data, as in the phrase “no longer relevant;”thus, it is fundamentally incompatible with freedom of speech and freedom of information. Data does not become irrelevant with the passage of time because data, while becoming irrelevant in one respect or according to a particular perspective, may become or remain relevant from other angles or for other reasons – e.g., for historians, journalists, social scientists, policy-makers, or cultural studies. In fact, the value of data does not reside in the data in itself but in the eyes of the beholder. People may find relevance in old data that other people do not see. Freedom of speech and freedom of information recognizes that pluralistic ideal and grants people of all remote idiosyncrasies the right to impart or receive information as long as such action does not present a high risk of immediate and substantial harm. Freedom of speech does not judge on the relevance of speech.
The popular defense of RTBF – that it does not apply to public figures or information of public significance – misses this point. Public interest is in constant flux. Suppression of seemingly insignificant data may suppress the possibility of public discourse because revelation of important public facts is often made possible by assembling a mosaic of facts that seem irrelevant to the majority of the people at given times. This is why RTBF is extremely problematic in many transitioning countries where full information is urgently needed to address impunities from colonial and dictatorial periods. Particularly in those countries, distinguishing between public and private figures is often impossible without the full availability of information.
Finally, RTBF does not condemn the so-called “no longer relevant information” itself, but rather focuses on making that lawful information available online. In the future, this may mean that, those, especially the impoverished, who are limited to using censored search results will not have access to the information that the rich will be able to uncover by hiring people to conduct brute investigations. RTBF is therefore directly opposed to the Internet’s potential as the equalizer and liberator in terms of facilitating people’s access to information.
We believe that the RTBF results from a misconception of the public realm in the digital age. There is a need for research to first understand the scope and dynamics of the public space after digitization. An increase in the amount and availability of information online affects our thinking about privacy, and it challenges our understanding of the public and the private. The RTBF as articulated by the ECJ, however, does not even attempt to do that, but rather tries to apply the norm regardless of whether it is public or private.
For these reasons, we believe that RTBF jurisprudence should be withdrawn and should not be expanded in any way.
Please sign here. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSftuxOmHMYdPVWQY3UOoZYnVd_eyWwUMi06nAh3LeVa7E-G4g/viewform?c=0&w=1
Building networks in geographically remote areas is one of the most important challenges that we need to meet. Internet has thrived because the networks and the content on them were built by private actors voluntarily who try to meet the demands of the users, and because of the shared control among different stakeholders, the multi-stakeholder model is important. To further increase access in geographically remote areas, we must incentivize private actors into building networks, and the private actors who are most efficient in monetizing access are global portals and therefore they are most incentivized in building networks. That is why you see Facebook developing solar panels, Google developing Loony Project, etc. These platforms’ entry into network building create various competition issues, i.e., verticial integration. Also, we can easily think of these content providers building networks or activating networks just for access to their contents, the case on point, Free Basics in India. Through the multi-stakeholder model, we should discuss how and whether to embrace these initiatives.
I think the problem with RTBF is that it does not make such distinction, i.e., for any personal data whether consisting of public content or private content, people accessing that data or search engine helping such people are imposed a burden to prove “public interest’ or drop from search. For instance, a stock broker puts out his financial information online to demonstrate his investment skills. Can he later suppress that information from search results “for being personal data” (maybe to avoid criticisms when his clients complain about bad performance of his portfolios)? If you say “no”, who is there to show public interest in keeping that data when the broker files a suppression request.
I think that RTBF has proximity to Internet shutdowns in para 19 because it disables critical functions of internet governance for reasons not related to access to illegal information. RTBF rule applies to information that is perfectly legitimate by itself and requires that information to be hidden from search. Internet shutdown does similar things to internet traffic.
The Internet has been the catalyst for an information revolution of the past few decades thanks to the way the data delivery cost has been crowd-sourced among all participants in the Internet so efficiently as to be reduced to almost zero except that all participants had to pay only for the cost of maintaining physical connections with the local neighbors (“internet access fee”, “transit fee”) in proportion of the connection capacities. This way of cost sharing allowed people to communicate en masse at the scales dwarfing that of postage and telephony. A current regulation in Korea mandating ISPs to charge one another for the volume of traffic sent (the sender pay model) contrarily to the Internet way of things, has already increased the IP transit cost in Seoul to 8 to 10 times that of Paris, London, and Frankfurt, and made it prohibitive for overseas contents to be distributed within Korea, making Korea suffer from “the worst latency among OECD countries.” While Korea is about to extend the sender pay rule directly to content providers and other users of the Internet, European Commission is also considering a proposal to charge ”fair share“ of data delivery costs on the content providers again presumably with regard tothe data sent. These proposals, already once discussed and rejected back in 2011-12 by ITU, OECD, and BEREC, will bring the civilization back to the days of scarce and expensive communication through telephony as people uploading contents for a large audience will be charged each view. The Internet access (or ”being online“) has been a homogeneous product everywhere: it was the full connectivity to everyone else online. With the sender pay model, only the contents whose data delivery fees has been paid will be made available to the subscribers of only those ISPs that received those fees. The Internet as each of you see will be vary and and therefore become fragmented depending on the negotiations among your local ISPs and content providers. The Internet will lose its meaning as the platform on which all the global citizens could communicate with one another directly, freely, equally, and vigorously. We at APrIGF demand that the policy makers in Korea and Europe exercise caution and take into account the voices of the people who will be affected by these changes.
The relationship between privacy and freedom of expression can be ariticated more. Because I am wondering why privacy may conflict to freedom of speech. Without the guarantee of using internet, users may tend to self-censoring their expression. That is the lack of privacy harms freedom of expression.
(In my last comment, I mean “articulated” more.)
The concept jumps from privacy to freedom of speech then lands on “hate speech” might be hard to understand. The core idea is that in order to make the internet open to everyone, to let users feel free to express their personalities as a human, we need the privacy and take serious to online abuse issues.
The progression of cyber security among the human interactions is an inevitable outcome but the barrier to which people being bullied with terms and data gathering is due to the system created by the people themselves. It’s a perfect world where every individual feeling safe online but the very platform is built by a human which means there’s always a back door flaw for intervention and manipulation. Perhaps the only alternative is a platform to be created, generated and regulated fully by a computer from scratch to development which in this sense requires years of human trust in technology to even start taking its shape in the first place.
I suggest we keep it general and just say “relevant agencies and the technical community” This is so that the judiciary (prosecutors and judges) and policy makers are also included here as well.
[ technical capabilities]
I would suggest that this be changed to read “technical and forensic capabilities”in the region. This is to capture that some of these CERT’s are intended to be the only technical forensic capability in their countries as in the case for Tonga until maybe the number of reported cases increase in the future.
Nuances of the concept of the “digital divide” need to be brought in – it’s no longer simply a matter of access, but also affordability. With new technologies, new digital divides have emerged, which have been observed (eg smart phone haves and have nots) but not dealt with.
Wi-Fi is a very specific technology and standard; do we mean spectrum for wireless connectivity?
This looks rather broad; categorization of people and aggregating data is a way of making sense of the world.
More facetiously, if we prevent data driven discrimination, does that mean we simply allow discrimination to be non-data driven; i.e. baseless? :)
Not all states make explicit the right to freedom of expression.
The recent trend is that censorship does not merely come in closing down of network or interrupted access to the Internet, but sometimes authoritative governments deliberately create traffic jam for websites that voices unfavourable opinions or opinions from the minority so that the website becomes unaccessible. Maybe this could also be acknowledged in the synthesis document and assistance and protection for those websites could be considered.
Also, in my opinion any disruptions to the access to mobile and Internet services should be avoided at all cost, no matter whether standards have been established in national legislation or what because access to internet is a basic human right which should not be violated. Laws that are against this human right are not justified, and provides an excuses for authoritative regimes in censorship.
I agree with you. I think it’s for us who are part of the IG to take it up and simplify further. But I do feel that these documents should not just remain as technical publications and shelved. Can a group of volunteers like us take it up and reach these issues to the actual end users of the internet? I am ready to volunteer.
Agree Amrita, and going forward I feel there is a strong need of a group that exclusively works or provides guidance on how such a public access could be provided, what infrastructure is needed, cost effectiveness, local ownership of such an infrastructure are some of the issues that need urgent attention especially in the context of hard to reach communities.
Education is the gateway to enabling youth to gain digital literacy and which will eventually lead towards digital citizenship. Thus it is important to educate the youth on how to be responsible nitizens who are ready for this internet centric world. We should aim to include more youth in engaging conversatios and spreading more awareness of internrt governance in the APAC region and others.
Building a resilient internet encompasses many facets such as making internet accessible during natural disasters such as typhoons and earthquakes. One such initiatives are LACS and LEOs which not only help end users who face natural disasters but also those who live in rural areas with either unstable internet connection or none at all. This helps create an internet which is able to overcome any obstacles it faces.
APRIGF can create others stakeholders group and assignment monitoring commission after each Forum and finally produce draft agreement adopt and on others subject debate who constitute input to APRIGF following.
There should be a way that promote and motivate more
An Internet service provider (ISP) is an organization that community-owned, non-profit ISP’s and IXP’s.
Duplication of roleplay within countries with problems related to their countries is better.
This was need to be discuss in a manner how we could use our best practices in the scenario.
Internet Restrictions and shutdowns affect Digital Economy at large. Internet restriction and shutdowns may cause serious problem when it comes to Emerging Technology usages.
Same time most of the emerging technologies need to be used to uplift the standards of people. Privacy is a major concern we all have to think of.
Internet Governance is still a topic of few. Real meaning of the Engagement still missing mainly within the developing nations. As countries we doesn’t need to make fake multistakeholderism within IG process just to make world know. When time passes real multistakeholderism will come in to ithe process.
School on Internet governance will be a key to educate people. Here we in Sri Lanka try to create academic syllabus to IG with the aim to promote in to University level model.
Incorrect paragraph selected. on above comment
Apart from including the youth, I think it is also important for us to include the elderly in the discussion. With the advancement and spread of smart gadgets, more and more middle-aged people and elderly are now using these smartphones for online activities and to connect with their family and friends. However, for quite a number of them are not as alert as young people, who are digital natives, when it comes to issues like cybersecurity and privacy protection. Some of them have only little understandings on these dangers, which means that they are probably more prone to cyber crimes, privacy breach and so on. It is essential to include them in the discussion of internet governance so that we can understand better about their difficulties and better address them.
Internet Access has hugely changed my personal life and helped me change that of other women around me. The Women’s Digital League was formed when I was fired from my teaching job because the private school I was working at would not give me maternity leave. Sitting at home with a simple dial up connection I found remote work. Earning my first $2.5 writing an article for someone in the US gave me much-needed confidence in my abilities. It was a stepping stone to becoming financially empowered and independent; being recognized as the top most impactful entrepreneur in Pakistan; and in showing women they didn’t have to accept status quo. With greater financial empowerment I ahve seen young women not settle for the first proposal that came for them as they were no longer a burden on their household; send siblings to school/college; have greater say in decisions at home; be more respected and therefore have a higher self-esteem.
I understand the balance between generalizing and uniqueness, and I suggest that adding one sentence to summarize APAC’s specific issue in each sub-theme. Or how about keeping the current sections, and adding several paragraphs to describe more detail/ particular topics for our region?
One of the key points highlighted during the workshop is the need for education and awareness.
1. Technical solutions and competencies are the technical deterrence to secure systems, to try and reduce or prevent technical vulnerabilities.
2. Legislation and laws are an approach to try and deter a behavioral motive but not necessarily prevent deter technical attacks. The bad guys do not care about laws.
3. Education and awareness is a user preventive measure from exposure to security vulnerability due to illiteracy and ignorance.
Therefore Education and awareness is an equally important measure to cyber security
[WS17. The Future of Digital Identity and Human Rights] Many of the governments are into digital identities. In the case of the Philippines, a National ID the law was just recently signed by the president. In a way, this is beneficial to the citizens in improving ease of transactions with among government agencies. But the question is, how resilient is our government in protecting our date. A data breach already happened in the Philippines which put 70M Filipinos’ personal data at risk. In the case of the National ID Law, we have to make sure that the Data Privacy Act will be reinforced to the government as the data controller and processor. Aside from that, a protocol has to be established to make sure that these data wont be compromised for whatever misuse.
[WS23. Big tech everywhere: Is this the future of the Internet? ] During the panel discussion there was a concern about Big Fall of Big Tech. It becomes a trend that big tech companies are acquiring small tech companies to expand their products and services, leaving people with still limited options on online products and services. However, we may not be able to stop these big companies from doing that, that is our business, certainly. But what we can do is start and keep supporting tech startups in out locality, help build the startup ecosystem, and create more options, even gradually. Let’s promote permissionless innovation, support our local tech startups, and raise awareness about internet governance to this community.
The eGovernment workshop involved getting ideas from the participants of what they would like to have in their eGovernment website if they were asked for input. As most of them in this group were from Vanuatu, and I know that Vanuatu is currently setting up their infrastructure for an eGovernment website, I will include these inputs into my report on the workshop and send a copy to the Vanuatu Government’s Office of Information and Communication. Hopefully the APRIGF can contribute some input into the development of their country’s new eGov system.
During the Digital Literacy session, I raised the huge reluctance by holders of traditional knowledge about healing medicines made from natural plants, to digitise information that has been gained by the use of generations of healers. They believe that by secularising this information would take away their “mana” – the God-given gift of healers. So how do we access and retain valuable information about the healing properties of our natural biodiversity, so that it doesn’t get lost over time and so that modern science can make use of the information to benefit others?
Great points Yeseul
I agree with Don that for underserved communities in our region affordability is a real barrier to access. Content in local languages should also be valued and encouraged.
Because legislation is the domain of governments should there not be some inclusion here of the importance of government decision makers being involved in these consultations regarding approaches to NN legislation?
Providing a forum at all these larger events for the youth to express their views is vital if the internet and its governance is to develop to meet their future needs. Kudos to APrIGF for the initiatives they have established for Asia Pacific youth.
Universal access is different.. but I would include it as part of this universality section. I think UA is definitely important.
The Nepal Wireless Connectivity Project (WS#90)
Last mile issues for developing countries. For example, although Pacific Islands governments realise the value of many newly established cable connections, many have not fully factored in the ongoing costs of ensuring that infrastructure and future maintenance, governance structures and human and other capacities match the potential of the connectivity.
Internet adoption is increasing slowly in the Pacific mainly due to its lack of affordability. There are still island countries where monopoly Telecoms (and even some where there are multiple providers, e.g. Papua New Guinea) put the internet out of reach of those who need the access, but it is too expensive. Many Pacific users only have access to the internet at work, Private connections are unaffordable on their low local wages. The cost for businesses as well as for learning, information and other valuable uses is quite prohibitive.
The SDGs provide significant focus areas for development in regions such as the Pacific and ICTs and internet connectivity could be a major contributor to this development. Unfortunately there is not enough research being done to identify how appropriate technologies and internet connectivity can effectively contribute to the future-proofing of mitigation measures being introduced by local donor-funded projects.
Arthit has mentioned below that some statistics related to the development of the APrIGF Synthesis Document could be included into this document, perhaps as an appendix (?)
This would add to its authenticity when we present it elsewhere. The appendix could briefly explain the process, the schedule, and the names of eventual contributors and/or where they come from within the region to demonstrate the spread of contributing voices.
Because paras 3 & 4 are about process and not content, they could be deleted (and the appendix section developed).
You raise an important point Hong with regards to the need for attention to copyright rules and a supporting legal environment to protect intellectual property in the rush for the development of online courses.
Home schooling during the pandemic imposed pressures on parents of students of all ages juggling their new teaching role, sometimes for several levels, with other family and paid work responsibilities. Many schools in the Pacific that were already challenged with regards to scarce teaching resources and inadequately skilled staff, failed to provide an appropriate online learning environment for their students. Many students received no education during the lockdowns brought about by the pandemic.
Capacity building and training for educators…. ARE needed to provide.. etc
Solar energy farms on isolated small islands have not only enhanced the quality of the air on these island environments, without the use of hazardous fossil fuels to power old generators, but the new power source has enabled 24×7 use of green technologies for health and education, with cleaner and less expensive power generation which supports a further reduction in any climate change impacts.
Thank you Jonathan. The text was a filler taken from the workshop 12 description, but thank you for reminding us of the toolkit and how it would be useful to refer to it with respect to strategies already in place.
Comments made in Town Hall session 1
* Kuo Wei – long workshops and ‘next billion’ focus
* Visharaad – inclusion of disability and accessibility guidelines
* Nigel – include data related to workshops and attendance, etc
* Ali – elearning – to raise greater awareness – different approaches for different target audiences
* Joyce – add capacity building as a separate ection
* Edmon – Privacy (transferred to S11)
* Jemil – include PWDs and acessibility
*Adeel – access issues..
* Edmon – supported capacity building – separate section explaining what we want to say about CB
* Vashkar – the SD must be accessible to all users – and language needs to be user friendly
* Winston – report consists of complicated language – format is great but formal concepts are expressed by technical experts – their credentials?
* Hong – general structure – some sections closely related – current headings may need to be renamed
* Mili – supported CB section – for newcomers – perhaps set up an information portal to assist with CB
*Wanawit – government – trade vs commerce
* Access – Michael Pepen, Benjz, Waqas, Hongwu Dai, Wanawit, Anna Thomas, Gangesh Varma
*Human Rights – Valencia
* Capacity Building – Mili
Sentence starting: “Building on… APrIGFs 2015 Macao and 2016 Taipei,….” OR “APrIGF 2015 Macao and APrIGF 2016 Taipei,”
Also “two webinars each followed by public comment periods, ”
Could there be an addition? “… collaborative open document detailing the significant deliberations which took place during the APrIGF 2017 Bangkok.” (ending the introductory para with an introduction to the most recent APrIGF)
(as well as “of those within” the broader APriGF…
Nevertheless it is anticipated by “the” APrIGF…
…thoughts in the Asia Pacific region as “a” contribution…
I would delete “the” before Best Practice Forums..
Replace “to be held from” December 2017 (with) “to be held on 18-21” December 2017
I would finish the sentence at “collaboration at a regional level.”
It also aims to aggregate national and local IGF discussions, and ultimately, to advance the … etc
I would suggest that we insert something in the sentence that begins “Community networks and public access to ICT ” and continue with…
“not only have the potential to improve digital literacy but also facilitate safe, effective, non-discriminatory access by all users, including women and children and those within marginalised and underserved communities.”
Last sentence is OK without the “And” at the beginning of the sentence. I know we all do it but its not grammatically correct :(
I like this paragraph
In the last sentence of this paragraph…
change”is funding as well as ensuring that… etc”
“is funding, however, it is also important to ensure that …etc”
Agree with Peng Hwa’s edits.. with amendment of the typo :)
I agree with the section beginning with statement about human rights being fundamental to the achievement of SDGs and also impressing on readers that human rights was a major area of “scrutiny and debate” at the APrIGF.
Great paragraph. I also think it addresses some of Ananda’s concerns from para#11.
Anyone with a gadget can access the whole world for collecting information and providing the same. Mainly in this pandemic situation it is the only possible platform for all the above. Even it is a virtual space still exists gender discrimination and attack against women. Then how they can be involve fearlessly in the cyber space? Question of equality is not solved yet. These are to be very seriously taken into consideration.
While the document is a great way to summarise the content at the conference, my concern is around the use and dissemination of the document and the learning thereby after the event.
Adding to the earlier comment it not just important to increase accessibility in the technological format sense, I also feel it is important to simplify the content in such a way that it is understood easily by all the end users of Internet broadly and can also serve as a user friendly document for referencing, learning for the new comers in the fraternity.
Lets do it! You can reach me at [email protected] and I will brief you on the plan. (Got one in my head)
A compiled list of actionable items/ or key takeaways…that summarises the discussion in the document for a quick scan. Point form. precise and objective.
Youth initiatives like yIGF, Netmission programs, various capacity building platforms to engage and encourage more and more youth to contribute to IG discussions. But necessary to highlight issues they face like the major problem is sustainability, funding, gender diversity especially in ASEAN.
Access issues in Asia are majorly driven by infrastructure and lack of basic facilities like electricity. Need to strengthen them first specially in remote terrains – Indonesia, Phillippines, India, etc in order to promote use of Internet.
People do not however, want to compromise freedom and speech for better access. Monopolisation of Internet by ISP’s or large telecom operators are detrimental to the pricing thus making internet access more affordable.
A strong law enforcement and regulation framework is needed to substitute the failure of the state in restoring peace and justifying their need to use Internet shutdowns as a mechanism.
Emerging technologies were amongst the hot topics and interestingly we discussed them from the ethics perspective too. One of the key terms that came along was a “rights based Internet” to help reinforce the open and accessible invariants of the Internet. But with ethics the challenge is where does it come in? At the programmer level, or early education? As ethics is a morality, it is also the major onus of all humans themselves in their own capacities. A good practice may be to focus on developing inter disciplinary curricula and ICT education to sound the unethical challenges that may spring from emerging tech.
A solid and detailed guideline for the enforcement body is essential. We cannot guarantee that the enforcement body would not perform any acts that go beyond the line and infringes ones’ privacy, even when its intention is to promote national security. In that connection, there must also be ways to stop those enforcement bodies from continuously infringing individual privacy.
In relation to the balance, it is also suggested that the guidelines should incline more to the protection of individual privacy, which is believed fundamental in human rights.
Aside from internet governance, internet itself is not generally known by the public in some pacific islands. As reflected by the local youth in yIGF, many of them said that the fact that they do not understand what internet is has hindered the progress of internet access.
In this connection, I think different stakeholders should also educate more on the basic concepts of internet in some pacific islands, which is also an important capacity building section. So with more knowledge on internet, internet access may be promoted, and so as internet governance eventually.
A more solid and detailed guideline is essential for enforcement bodies. We cannot guarantee that the enforcement bodies would not go beyond the line that excessively infringes ones’ privacy. In that connection, there have to be ways or directives to prevent those enforcement bodies from continuously infringing ones’ individual privacy, even when its intention is to protect national security.
In relation to the balance, it is suggested that the guideline should incline more on the side of individual privacy, as this is fundamental in human rights.
Appreciate the good work done by the organising team in selecting the theme, speakers and conducting without any issue. The three themes are very relevant and challenges discussed are very eye opening. The discussions were very good. The buddy group and mentor was very supportive.
AI is a broad terminology used. Machine learning techniques are improving day by day. New algorithms are showing improvements over the previous ones. The efficiency of the system depends on how well we train the data. Technology alone cannot solve the problem of hate speech, but can help tackle it to a large extent.
The earlier issues of economic divide, digital divide and gender divide all play a role here. Empowering the parents through constant sessions are needed. Along with the usage training, “ethical usage” should also be introduced to kids and parents.
Internet evolved as technology for non technologist. WWW is one technology which can be attributed for this sucess.
Awareness campaigns though all media specially social media is very much needed .
The pandemic COVID 19 increased the pace of digitization in developing economies. There was an overnight shift. This helped in continuing the life without any break. The other side of the issue is the digital literacy and cyber security awareness.
The The warmth of the meet and greet is very much missing . Listening continuously in online media is giving Zoom fatigue.
Building Trust on the Internet ( Surveillance state in AP)- In my view, it is very important that all the stakeholder have optimum trust in the platform. To achieve the same all the stakeholders have to shoulder responsibilities.
End user are to be made aware of their privacy needs.
Content provider and Collaboration tools ( Read Twitter, Facebook) that form important part of the ecosystem have to derive and develop plans to incorporate trust; Segregating private and public space for the end user.
Government and regulator have to be made responsible for respecting and building trust.
In my opinion, a lot of machines would constitute to a bigger portion of the next billion that would be joining the internet. Machine to Machine communication would be an integral part of internet expansion. Its important that security by design is considered in M2M communication.
While these treaties and agreement would be certainly helpful in ensuring the cross border data flow, which was one of the building block of the internet, it would be beneficial to have it done providing a level playing field to all the parties involved. Mechanism should be inbuilt in these treaties ensuring that the further development of digital economy for the developing countries are not compromised in any ways. This also include offsetting measures that data localization brings to the parties advantage.
hello, I am mokabberi from Iran, advisor of cyber policy research institute.
how can we promote inclusive norm making process reqarding these below consideration:
1. shaping Fair, democratic, global and ethical internet governance mechanism is key precondition for cyber security norm making process can overcome mistrusts.
2. we should also work on norms of responsible behavior of tech company
3. ITU can play role in cyber security standardization to secure ICTs products supply chain security
4.we should also consider smart lethal weapons and fake attributions
l thinks this process will lead to more militarization of cyberspace and cyber weapean race and establishing AIEA for cyberspace and let some country for unilateral coercive measure in cyberspace like digital countermeasure
This process like applying IHLs in digital realm and turn it into conflict zone is against the vision of peaceful and development-oriented internet for human goods
A percent of (for example about 5 percent) of taxes of global tech companies and digital platforms that payed to governments can allocated for IGF budget for the implementation of IGF strategic plan and research and development Fund in the field of internet governance in national and international level . By this initiative funding problems of NRIS will be solved.
this suggestion can be enclouded in aprigf massage :
One suggestion for increase of financial Strengths of IGF
A percent of (for example about 5 percent) of taxes of global tech companies and digital platforms that paid to governments can allocated by them for IGF budget for the implementation of IGF strategic plan and research and development Fund in the field of internet governance in national and international level . By this initiative funding problems of NRIS will be solved.
hello, from mokabberi from iran.
we have seen some organized disinformation and fake news in social media with geopolitical purpose ,for example we clearly see that some networks of fake accounts and bots are producing fake news against shia muslims in the name of sounni muslims and at the same time, they are spreading disinformation and hate speech against sunni muslims in the name of shia muslims. We all know who benefits from conflict between muslims and Who benefits from conflict between russia and europe.
what should be done with this organized disinfo at global level that want to make hostilities among nations and religious groups in the world to gain iligimate economical and political interest?
Regulation? Digital ethics? Awareness and digital litracy?
Declaration by stakeholders?
Change my address to C/- Poste Restante, Vanuatu Post Limited, Port Vila Republic of Vanuatu.
This has to be done at the grass roots level or community Services Organisations level for Vanuatu.
to affordable internet in the pacific region
This was a good session. Particularly due to the dialogue between Private Sector, academia and civil society on Covid-19 apps being rolled out by governments. The role of the private sector and governments under different jurisdictions to ensure privacy rights as well as the long-term implications of such apps on privacy rights were discussed.
Many radical ideas were shared in this session. Particularly:
1. The need to have conversations on what happens before digital violence.
2. How laws and legal systems primarily police the human body instead of policing the crime. Also the very important question on the consent and the category of victim on the internet.
3. Challenging the notion that laws are unbiased responses to oppression. Another important point on how caste oppression gets copy-pasted online and with digital violence.
4. Lack of algorithmic accountability and how the social media we use breaks down our behaviors, even our bodies into categories and the biases they propagate.
5. The inadequacy of the very imagination of the government regarding digital spaces and rejected the traditional mindset that applies to policymaking in digital spaces.
How are we going to face the future challenges in cyber threats?
when talking about other elements the resources and support that helps to empower access needs to be considered
What are the roles of all stakeholders in access provision and inclusion, and the provision of education and training for information literacy and digital literacy, including the responsible exercise of these skills with respect for other people? 3 recommendations that should be implemented by Internews to help the community especially.
First of all is to go back to basics. We might have the understanding that we are going to go into communities with the power and privilege we have compared to the community that we are going to serve. However, we should view anything that we are going to do with the community as a learning process for both parties. Listen first to their information and the knowledge they know so far. Assessment within the community to adapt on what they want and what they need. Only then education and awareness take place to disseminate the knowledge.
Secondly, we should hold on to the principle of do no harm in a more practical way. When talking about information it can be accessed online and offline. For the online platform, the way we engage with the community should be based on their understanding and we do not want to open can of worms where we educate them on how to get the information but not how to control themselves to impart the knowledge properly. Either urban or rural communities, they are all prone to the danger of the internet and false news. This is where we should be careful on what we go through with them as at the end we could not just leave them without properly briefing them on the online danger too.
Thirdly, no one is left behind. We tend to assume that rural communities have a lack of access for information. However, there are reports of those educated and also professionals that fell into scams and did not know properly on how to differentiate the quality and originality of the information. This could cause more harm in the society and community. The outreach of the programme should comprise the rural, urban poor and community organizers that will help the community in exercising their knowledge and rights and in a way enhance their literacy.
UA is a foundational requirement for multilingual Internet, in which users around the world can navigate via DNS entirely in local languages. UA needs coordination efforts by the private sector, technical & academic communities, civil society, and governments to ensures that all domain names and email address internationalization (EAI) can be used by all Internet-enabled applications, devices, and systems.
There is an importance need to make everyone from the stakeholders aware of the UA and its tight connection with the IDNs and what advantages it can provides to the general public. Awareness is not enough but creating the drive or motives to demand all stakeholders of serious efforts towards the inclusiveness of the IDNs and EAI.
There are few research and development experiments in APAC region on IDNs and EAI, but more resources is needed to work on standardization.
Creating a consistent environment of enabling the access of local content with local domain name and send and receive emails using the local email address.
[ Internet Governance & Multi-Stakeholder Participation ]
No one denies the importance to make the voice of underrepresented communities be heard at APrIGF or any other IGFs. But at the end of the day, it will discussions that “could” be heard by the decision making bodies but there might not be any follow up.
What would be a good approach is to develop the connection between APrIGF Community (like MSG, or other subject matter experts to join ITU Government delegates for consultancy during the development of ITU resolutions.
[WS6. Analyzing Perspectives on Youth Participation in the Multi-stakeholder Landscape: A Contextual Follow-Through Session on Motivations to Sustainability Efforts]
APrIGF has to be proud of having youth organizing a session and sharing experiences. Attended the meeting thinking that there will be discussions on how the Youth fit into the overall scene in the IGFs, but the focus of the workshop was on the different youth initiatives. What was shared of the youth engagement in the Philippines would give an example of how youth are contributors to policy development in their own country.
Norms should be developed from bottom-up in multistakeholder model.
Great research, this bottom-up of putting Norms when talking about children stopped me.
The digital norms are taking the net citizen to a completely different path of norms that was practiced before the Internet. Hence, the MS model that you are mentioning that need to be developed on an equal footing. To bring the experience and wisdom of the past with the practices of today.
So far cybersecurity laws have failed to protect the freedom of speech.
The problem that most states are putting regulations without wider public consultation. It depends on parliament members to comment or endorse new laws.
Would be possible to do some changes in the jurisdiction model to bring balanced views?
[WS48. A roadmap for studying ICT laws and building a database for Asia]
I didn’t attend this session, however, the organizer of this workshop could benefit of the pilot project that was done by iGmena to: Internet Legislation Atlas
“The ILA aims to pinpoint opportunities for improvements and contribute to raising the awareness of concerned stakeholders, and empowering civil society to participate in the Internet policy dialogue in the regional and global level and influence the decision-making process in the local level. This is done through:
Mapping the legal landscape in each country as it relates to the Internet and civil society.
Outlining gaps and ambiguities among existing laws and regulations in relation to international human rights standards.
Highlighting opportunities for advocacy regarding Internet-related law and policy in each country drawing on international human rights standards and best practices.
Connecting civil society to resources that will help them navigate the legal environment.”
[WS12. Coping with misinformation in an era of information deluge: Who is Responsible?]
Who is responsible: basically, every single person of us who share information either verbally, by email or through social media networks without authenticating it.
The challenge that we all face that the misinformation are getting smarter and hard to even an intelligent person to identify it. For example, the AI deep fake application which is available to anyone easy to use. This application can give anyone the tool to take a photo and use audio to make a video. This application has a double edge sword as artist and ad producer could be creative to do very creative videos but on the other hand, those who produce disinformation could use it as well to mislead the general public.
As disinformation are using AI, Many issues must be considered.
-Increase evidence-based policy research as there is a lack of evidence on the impact or influence of the use of technology or AI for disinformation campaigns.
-Clickbait and targeted advertising business models that are based on the promotion of sensationalist news as a means of competing in the market for individuals’ attention. Big companies employ algorithms that exploit user data. Hence, there is a need to have serious discussions on how to protect users data.
Hence Data protection
If the illegal collection and access to users’ data is stopped, micro-targeted disinformation campaigns would lose much of their effectiveness and threat potential. As is already clear, weak data protection rules and enforcement not only impact user privacy and choice, but also lead to constant monitoring, profiling, and “nudging” towards political and economic decisions.
[WS35. Language Diversity in Asia-Pacific: Challenges towards Digital Dividends]
According to UNESCO, there are more than 6000 languages worldwide.
To have a practical approach to digital language diversity and local content is to adopt policies that encourage local content producers. Countries in APAC region adopted the official languages, hence all content hast to depend on those languages and reduce the dependency on content produced from the developed countries.
This approach might put some communities into a disadvantage. But empowering minorities to produce their content and in their own languages will help to preserve it.
On another aspect, algorithm bias in search engines does create a divide based on the language the users are searching with.
The challenging of implementing good eGovernment services in developing economies is the infrastructure and reaching to the last mile.
Hence along with the development of the portal, the Government has to develop the right strategies to the grantee that their e-services do reach out to every single citizen. It might be done by allocating certain stations in the remote areas.
Unfortunately, our people are not even familiar with the basic concepts of digital literacy and digital citizenship. So, there is a dire need to educate and aware our public.
Including digital literacy in school and college curriculums, funding organizations that are working in this regard and hosting more initiatives and platforms to educate people are necessary to make internet a safe space for all.
Moreover, as discussed in one of the sessions, a multi stakeholder approach to regulate Internet without harming the rights of freedom of speech and expression has become a need of the hour.
already held, should be changed to past tense
If possible, there should be included the number of participation in this para before mentioning theme, both online and in-person participation which will give a scope of the conference
its best to highlight prominent issues here, so readers from the very start know the kind of issues being discussed throughout the report
Under this track, following workshops explored some of the …
its better to use correct form of Covid as COVID-19 throughout the document
*to be inclusive
repetition of word “more” suggestion delete
can be rephrased as disinformation has become one of …… on the internet all over the world particularly Asia
Use full form
The latest report by UN Women and UNFPA in 2021 indicates that online misogyny has risen since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes trolling, sexual harassment, and victim blaming….
This is quite relevant as the spread of health-related misinformation and scare have been running rampant on the internet, especially on social media platforms where anyone and everyone can write anything. This adds to the stress and eventually, physician burnout of having to correct the wrong notions (and even deal with the hardheadedness) of the general public.
People in many countries still do not recognize the cert, both cyber attacks, people should know.
Should be done public guide. To let the public know what the cert is responsible for, why should you know?
Make a public guide about Cybersecurity For the common people.
The Cybersecurity public guide and Cert public guide are must not use a lot of manual text, use the infographic to explain.
Need to publicize why large organizations should have their own cert.
Consult the public before issuing Internet control or censorship rules. Because some cases do too unnecessarily. Violations of privacy and privacy
In Thailand I very concerned about this concept. “The Council for the Advancement of the Reform of the Nation,” with the intention of “fully regulating Social Media,” with excessive censorship or blockade, violating privacy rights, being able to sneak information at any time, blocking its services. nation By claiming that the protection of the internet and games addict.
(News link (in thai) https://www.beartai.com/news/179268 )
I want thailand Should be like this
The voice of a Thai youth on IGF and internet governance. #APrIGF2017 #APrIGF pic.twitter.com/uGcLMwVTps
— EMPOWER (@empowermalaysia) July 29, 2017
The voice of a Thai youth on IGF and internet governance. #APrIGF2017 #APrIGF pic.twitter.com/uGcLMwVTps
— EMPOWER (@empowermalaysia) July 29, 2017
I do not agree to have access to services blocked. But it should guide the public to know how to prevent the danger of content on the Internet for your children, however, should be better. Because the current system to support parents are already good. But parents lack knowledge.
I think : I do not agree to have access to services blocked. But it should guide the public to know how to prevent the danger of content on the Internet for your children, however, should be better. Because the current system to support parents are already good. But parents lack knowledge.
Before the law governing the use of online media, content censorship. Should ask people first. Because there are times when the government has a broader law or violated the privacy rights too.
I think : Before the law governing the use of online media, content censorship. Should ask people first. Because there are times when the government has a broader law or violated the privacy rights too.
Compromised IoT devices, such as webcams or even lightbulbs, can be used to form “botnets”, networks of Internet-connected externally controlled devices. These devices, referred to in this context as “bots”, are often infected with malicious software and used for disruptive or criminal purposes. Understanding the growing impact that IoT security has on the Internet and its users is critical for safeguarding the future of the Internet. IoT manufacturers, IoT service providers, users, standards developing organizations (SDOs), policymakers, and regulators will all need to take action to protect against threats to Internet infrastructure.
One of the key obstacles to improving internet penetration in rural and remote areas is last mile connectivity. The lack of commercial viability, as well as huge network roll-out costs worry operators who are reluctant to make the necessary investments. Community Networks are considered as an excellent supplement solution to address last mile connectivity. They do require a strong support from policy makers and some of the steps that could be taken in this regards are:
1. Streamline or eliminate related regulatory requirements, especially those that are not applicable to small, community-based networks.
2. Expand universal service and other public funding opportunities, and publicize / include community networks as eligible for funding through universal service fund.
3. Introduce approaches to provide spectrum access and innovative licensing for community network operators.
4. Encourage community initiatives to build networks aiming to reduce digital divide.
It is also important to consider that not one solution can work / can apply everywhere and the most critical aspect behind success of a community network is ‘sustainability’ that usually comes with a supporting business model.
One of the issues discussed during the week was routing security. Every year, thousands of routing incidents occur, each with the potential to harm user trust and handicap the Internet’s potential.
Spoofed Internet traffic is a persistent threat, and often the root cause of reflection Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.All stakeholders including policymakers, must take steps to strengthen the security of the global routing system.
Best practices, like the Mutually Agreed Norms for Routing Security, provide a clear path for network operators to take towards addressing these routing threats.
While we action on cybersecurity threats on the Internet application layer, we cannot fail to Protect the Core (technical layer)
[WS55.Community Networks] One of the key obstacles to improving internet penetration in rural and remote areas is last mile connectivity. The lack of commercial viability, as well as huge network roll-out costs worry operators who are reluctant to make the necessary investments
Policy makers and Regulators can facilitate initiatives like Community Networks to bridge last mile connectivity gaps by:
– Streamlining or eliminating regulatory requirements, especially those that are not applicable to small, community-based networks.
– Provide tax, customs, regulatory, and licensing fee exemptions.
– Provide clear, public guidance on the specific policies and regulatory requirements (and exemptions) for community networks.
– Expand universal service and other public funding opportunities to community networks.
– Introduce innovative approaches for licensing and spectrum access
The United Nations estimates that one in six people live with disability – that is a total of 650 million women, men and children in the Asia-Pacific region.
People with Disability (PWDs) face various challenges in accessing the Internet based on their impairment. For example, persons with visual impairments can face compatibility challenges when screen reader software is used to access visual displays that are not labelled or hyperlinks that do not make sense when read out of context.
If designers of digital technologies and content keep accessibility at the heart of design activities, people with disability can be empowered to do more themselves, without having to rely on others. In contrast, if designers miss out on accessibility, they continue to develop products and content that increases barriers for people with disability when using digital technologies and content.
Although, there are known and easy to implement guidelines to address the barriers, many developers of web content, mobile applications and related digital technologies usually do not consider people with disability while designing or updating their products. With such a large number of the population with disabilities, businesses are potentially losing out if accessibility issues are not considered, and the universal design concept is not understood and adopted. Universal design means that businesses improving consumer products such as hardware, software, websites and applications to make them usable for a broader section of the community including people with disability, in turn, gain reach to a much larger consumer base in more situations.
It is very important to recognize PWDs as one of the stakeholders in the development of policies and technologies, and to educate the community (especially content developers) about the importance of equal access for PWDs. Promoting digital accessibility contributes to the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and ensure that the rights of PWDs are met.
Diminishing trust is a challenge for the Internet – all of the creativity and innovation we see on the Internet is based on users trust. Internet of Things (IoTs) will play a crucial role in maintaining this trust.
Poorly secured IoT devices and services can serve as entry points for cyber attacks, compromising sensitive data and threatening the safety of individual users. Understanding the growing impact that IoT security has on the Internet and its users is critical for safeguarding the future of the Internet.
Many organizations are working hard on IoT security and privacy issues, but there is a need for all stakeholders, including policymakers, manufacturers, and consumers, to make good choices about the future of IoT and security.
This section should be framed from a human rights perspective. This is actually a dangerous section as some repressive Asia Pacific countries use these words “cultural differences” or “cultural specificities” as excuse to not respect human rights and even violate human rights.
so I’m suggesting to delete this
or APrIGF Multistakeholder Synthesis (without the word “Document”)
Key issues in the Asia Pacific Region
Key issues in the AP region
this is my comment to para 5. not sure why this appeared here.
Let’s please be consistent with calling this document as Synthesis Document.
suggestion: “common issues of interest”
We can’t leave anyone behind. We must think and work together, articulating the academy with the state, communities and private companies, to truly democratize access to ICT, including the empowerment of people in the safe, productive and meaningful use of technology.
We do support the idea of having “Capacity Building” add to the document, while we have worked on toolkit about youth engagement program e.g. the yigf and hkyigf initiative we have organized, that we can put our input a bit.
As well as there is workshop on Day 3 to discuss how to move forward for the AP region next generation engagement initiative. Happy to recap our discussion outcome and add to the mentioned session.
Redefined Youth Participation – Refine and rediscover a new model to youth participation beyond current practices for better integration rIGF and related youth IGF. Models like small-scale group discussion are effective in closing the gap between youth delegates and rIGF delegates. At the same time, it is important to recognize the language barriers and to encourage the production of related conference material in local languages (if possible).
The challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) worsened by COVID-19:
1. Lack of digital literacy a lack of sign language interpreters. Students with visual learning material lack of competence in using screen readers.
2. Difficulty using learning platforms and course exams or assessment. Students with visual impairments experienced a lack of descriptions for informative images in teaching notes, and difficulties in using learning management systems.
3. Difficulty communicating with support services, faculty/instructors and fellow students when SWDs live in family homes.
Think an additional paragraph referencing the desirability of governments working with all stakeholders in promulgation of such policies and legislation should be added; this was consensus of the Session this morning (run by Joyce Chen).
Librarian supports multiliteracies and assists learners become better inquirers and ethical creators of information.
With adequate funding and training, libraries are in a unique position to do support information literacy and digital literacy. I shared my story to highlight that it can be done in the Pacific.
School librarians support multiliteracies and assists learners become better inquirers and ethical creators of information.
With adequate funding and training, libraries are in a unique position to support information literacy and digital literacy. I shared my story to highlight that it can be done in the Pacific. *Why can’t digital literacy and information literacy work together? If you’re rolling out digital literacy initiatives, work with your public, community and school libraries. Better still work with the National Library to roll these initiatives out.
The encryption debate must be set against the wider context of the region’s efforts to make the Internet more accessible, secure and trustworthy.
As IG stakeholders, we must ensure that policies that impact the Internet do so positively, and contribute to its growth as an enabler and a force for good for APAC societies and economies.
The policies that have been enacted in APAC (TOLA and Revised IL Rules), undermine a core technology, encryption, that underpin the Internet’s security, and the security of everyone on the Internet.
These policies create opportunities for wider surveillance and data collection, more potent cyberattacks, and greater online abuse.
They impair businesses’ ability to compete regionally and in the global market, as recent studies show [https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2021/the-economic-impact-of-laws-that-weaken-encryption/]
These come at a time of APAC’s ever growing reliance on the Internet to run governments and businesses, respond to citizens’ needs, and to be an overall lifeline in a world increasingly shaped by the ongoing pandemic.
The challenges that spur these policies are important, but these are broad and long-standing societal problems predating the Internet, and cannot be solved by weakening security for everyone.
Data should have classification. For example personal data, financial data, historical records, fake news etc. And each class should have its own models and methods for being forgotten. Emphasis on financial data and if forgetting financial data is wise or not is also a topic worth exploring.
case studies of cyber crime and model/traditional penalties (of course with anonymizing the victims) could be made available to the cyber crime eradication training programs
We often talk about how to reach the users to raise awareness. We could consider the power of advertisements on websites as advertisements contributes heavily to the digital economy. different advertisements can promote holistic internet governance and the multi-stakeholder approach and make them aware that they have a say and they can make their voices count.
Each APrIGF could reflect on its predecessor. That is we could set out some goals each year and next year evaluate what have we done to achieve those goals.
ICT infrastructure prerequisites other facilities such as uninterrupted electricity supply. However internet connection is useless if we don’t have the power to fuel it. so we need to speed up other development processes to match digital progress
Given the volume of IOT devices, it is difficult for regulators to validate the security of each device. Would be similar to testing every brand and variation of items in a grocery market shelves. Self regulation by identifying who does comply with IOT security standards and other guidelines is necessary. While ISOC is taking an initiative to provide such checklists; possibly the National CERTs could be the ones responsible for providing tools and guidelines for the consumers.
Community Networks are proven and are becoming a trend. Perhaps some discussion is necessary. While community networks were a session in 2018 APrIGF it was also a session in 2017; specifically supporting ICT resilience and emergency communication. Community networks were also identified as means for solutions for landlocked and small developing islands. The backhaul for such networks would come from big players like Facebook, Google.
How the Internet (the Internet sector, but more importantly, the Internet community) can have the most positive impact in the Environment?
Some issues to help frame global IGF Environmental Theme:
a) incentives for sharing data by public and private sectors as digital public goods
b) environmental data governance
c) collaborative environmental analytics (citizen science and open datasets)
d) AI-algorithm transparency for data integration and analytics for digital public goods
e) dealing with misinformation and fake news about the environment
f) e-waste and product lifecycle
g) early warning systems, disaster recovery and emergency response, specially in the Pacific
At the workshop today, WS89 “Whois” collected, disclosed and protected: How we care about protecting data privacy?”, there are elements about Whois that had to do with cybersecurity, specially the use of Whois for traceability and attribution. However, not only Law Enforcement Agencies use the Whois for this purpose. There are other entities, such as CERTs, that use Whois to monitor behavior regularly but, importantly, for incident response purposes. It is important that CERTs have access to Whois, as public accessibility might be restricted due to privacy considerations.
During workshop WS89 “Whois” collected, disclosed and protected: How we care about protecting data privacy?” we discussed how privacy considerations have been strengthened in light of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), an European set of privacy rules that have impacted the way Whois publishes personal information of Domain Name holders. These rules are not limited to Europe but have extraterritorial enforceability, adding new considerations to ICANN contracted parties, such as Registries and Registrars, that need to comply with both, the GDPR and their contractual agreements with ICANN. This has trumped community-led policy development processes at ICANN, requiring an expedite process for Registrar and Registrars to agree on new policies for their Whois services to comply with GDPR. It is important to improve monitoring capability of future legislation that may have impact on services such as Whois; but also prevent that multistakeholder processes be overturned by regulatory processes.
Perhaps could be good, in an introductory paragraph, a mention to the presentation by Vint and Chengetai about the recent launch, by the UN Secretary General, of the High Level Panel on Digital Cooperation. The APrIGF community may acknowledge the Panel and appreciate the efforts by Chengetai and Vint to reach out to this community and the mapping of different issues. Perhaps we can also set some expectations about the level of openness, inclusiveness and transparency in which the panel will be working; and also perhaps recommend that the voice of the HLP is very much welcomed, but not necessarily representative of the multistakeholder community.
At the “Know Your Net – Enabling A-Z competences with Net Tech in the Pacific” workshop there was an excellent discussion about three critical challenges that the Internet is facing in terms of its future stability and security. These are: IPv6, DNSSEC and routing security. The future of the Internet highly depends on the successful implementation of policies and best practices and the increased implementation of these three critical measures.
Actually, on second thoughts, this mention to the HLP can more appropriately be placed in the section on Multistakeholder Participation in Internet Governance (???).
Agree, John Jack! Perhaps it deserves a mention in the report that there has been a most positive development, in the recent 2-3 years, as new CERTs are being established in the Pacific. Tonga, PNG and Vanuatu are three great examples on inclusive CERT developments that bring great cybersecurity benefits to the community.
Paragraph #2 is quite negative to the Internet. While consideration of risks and threats is important, it is best to address the Internet evolution in a positive light and find opportunities in every threat. Possible rephrase:
One of the main themes discussed at the APrIGF in Vladivostok, was peaceful collaboration towards a safer Internet. This included questions such as (paragraphs 2 and 3):
How can the Internet community participate more actively in the international cybersecurity discussions and encourage more co- operative measures? What shall the digital ethics be for businesses? How shall we take into account the concept of public goods and the commons vs. data ownership and privatization of knowledge? How can we keep the positive elements of “localized” Internet while being aware of its downsides? To enhance trust and security, how can we enhance the capacity building effort and how do we bridge the gap between technical and non-technical understanding of securing the Internet?
While there are growing concerns on issues such as misinformation, fake news, hate speech and harassment, online violence and terrorism, organized cybercrimes, market concentration in cloud services, data breaches resulting in a decrease of trust as well as a wave of state regulations to mitigate the cybersecurity risks. To maintain cyber hygiene, what kind of policies and governance model shall be adopted to tackle these issues and achieve a safer Internet? What should be the key considerations for states when creating these regulations? How shall we maintain legal interoperability of laws and extraterritorial data protection on the Internet? Should the Internet be regulated by the states solely and what is the impact of these existing regulations on the Internet? How should the balance be drawn between state interference on Internet infrastructure and a free and open Internet?
This is an improved version which I support.
Perhaps move purpose of synthesis document BEFORE the Introduction?
Not sure the right term is “transnational”. Question can be rephrased as: Does this needs to be regulated by International Law?
A closing paragraph is needed, also to reflect how the Synthesis Document can help to connect APrIGF with the global IGF, also to include statistics of how many people registered and participated at the APrIGF and general statements about the success of the event and the vibrancy of the community.
This is my comment on the whole page. Just for demo purposes.
Rural connectivity is very imporant; however I do not believe that it requires “global changes to the Internet”. I suggest to relocate this goal to Para 28 (“Continuing efforts in bringing the next billion online”).
Rural connectivity is very imporant; however I do not believe that it requires “global changes to the Internet”. I suggest to relocate this goal to Para 28 (“Continuing efforts in bringing the next billion online”).
sorry, this comment can be deleted (wrong paragraph).
As a general principle it is important that this document should primarily reflect the proceedings of the APrIGF 2016. Ideally this would be demonstrated by referencing every paragraph here to a specific APrIGF session (or sessions) in which the comment or contribution was made. I wonder if we can make an effort to add these references? IMHO this would increase the value and credibility of this document immensely.
A smaller point:
Capitalisation of “Internet” and “Internet governance” should be consistent.
My proposal is to capitalise “the Internet” because in this community we strive for the preservation of a single Internet as opposed to “many internets”. The proper noun (capitalised) is therefore correct.
[to document the input from participants]
to document the contributions and conclusions of participants
[participation in the movement]
participation in the IGF process
[Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum]
The Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum
[observations and recommendations]
contributions and suggestions
– “contributions” is consistent with paragraph 4.
– “suggestions” is better than “recommendations”, because it avoids the implication of formality
[This document also intends to form an input to the ]
This document will be submitted as an input to the
[Given the wide spectrum of social, economic, political and geographic diversity in the region,]
Given the social, economic, political and geographic diversity in the region
– “wide spectrum of” is redundant here.
[they skew wealth further ]
they skew benefits further
– benefits of the Internet are not only financial.
– I don’t think this paragraph says anything substantial. Therefore I suggest to delete it completely, unless someone is able to clarify what is being said here (eg re the type of “global changes”, and their implications).
[protection of information systems]
protection of online systems
[must meet internationally guaranteed right to privacy]
must meet internationally recognised rights to privacy
[Considering the nature of cross-border data transfer for online services, users’ difficulties in being aware of these complications and differing levels of protection in relevant jurisdictions, the highest level of protection should be guaranteed as a default safeguard.
Considering the nature of cross-border data transfer for online services, differing levels of protection in relevant jurisdictions and general lack of user awareness, the highest level of protection should be guaranteed as a default safeguard.
[Across Asia legislation]
Across the Asia Pacific region, legislation
Perhaps a new paragraph here about diversity of participation in Internet governance processes, and the proposed “report card” on diversity of IGF events?
Should we include a summary of APrIGF 2016 participation in this document, eg as an appendix?
[The use of the multistakeholder model in Internet governance was approved by the United Nations and receives broad support internationally.]
The multistakeholder model of Internet governance has been recognised and endorsed by the United Nations, and receives broad support internationally.
[Digital economy and trade are key enablers for the development of the world economy. Now that the digital economy has becomes the economy as such, it does not have any borders. ]
Digital economy and trade are key enablers for the development of the world economy, yet they severely challenge traditional national borders.
– It is not clear what this paragraph is referring to. The specific process underway within ICANN, which has resulted from the IANA transition process, is the CCWG on ICANN Accountability. Its “work stream 2” will continue to produce improvements in ICANN structure and processes, but it’s not clear that this is what Para 31 is referring to.
– This seems to repeat the content of Para 34, so I suggest that this one (#35) can be deleted).
for publication, and submission to the IGF 2016 Community Intersessional Program
It’s not clear where this input have come from, or why they are provided here within Appendix 2. I think this needs to be better explained. Maybe also the input needs to be provided in the main text and not within this appendix where it may be lost.
Same comment goes for 42/45/59 below.
See para 40.
See para 40 above.
See 40 above.
I will repeat something that I said at the mic. :-)
This is a reminder about the purpose of this document, which is to report the discussions and agreements of the APrIGF 2018.
So, this document isn’t a place to add new points or positions which were not actually raised or discussed on the floor, in the workshops of the meeting.
Also, it is very useful when posting comments here, to state the actual WS or session which they relate to. That will help the drafting team to add the right footnotes and references in the final document.
The session brought up many important issues related to ensuring that internet governance spaces like the APrIGF are inclusive and welcoming of new entrants:
1. For many who are interested in internet governance, spaces like the APrIGF seem daunting as they feel their lack of expertise or experience on these issues prohibits them from making a meaningful contribution. For them, programs like APSIG are very important but are not always accessible. There was a consensus on the importance of having more programs like this that build capacity of internet governance practitioners who are new to the field.
2. Diversity is critical in APrIGF and other internet governance spaces but it is not only enough to have diverse representation in the room, it is also important that the conditions for them to meaningfully participate are created. For instance, provisions for language, disabilities and creating awareness among the broader audience about being mindful and sensitive to the needs of diverse groups.
3. People need sustained opportunities to participate in spaces like APrIGF. One of the key factors is the lack of availability of resources. For instance, fellowships allow individuals only one-time opportunity to participate in IG spaces like APrIGF but it doesn’t provide opportunity for sustained engagement. There is a need to allocate more resources to allow new people to participate but also allow for sustained participation of groups.
4. Online engagement has been very important in the context of the pandemic, and it is also much more accessible for many people and groups; however, it doesn’t compare to being in these spaces in person since that is the only way to truly understand how they function, to meet people, build a network and engage meaningfully, without feeling disconnected from the process.
5. The APrIGF is a multi-stakeholder process but it doesn’t have equal representation from all stakeholders. Important stakeholders like the government and private sector are not as engaged as they ideally should be. There is a need to engage them more actively to bring them into the conversation. Similarly, there is a need to engage under-presented groups and regions within Asia. The work of the stakeholder engagement committee is very important in this regard.
6. Internet governance in Asia is not just the APrIGF. The APrIGF is not a decision-making forum but a discussion forum. A lot of important decisions around the internet get made in other spaces and at the national level. New entrants must learn about and engage more in these processes as well, especially at the national level and push for more change there.
7. The APrIGF is a space for everyone, irrespective of their background, identity or expertise. Anyone interested in this process can and should become a part of it by joining the MSG and other committees, so that newer and more diverse voices can shape its future.
The session highlighted some key points on the state of digital rights in different countries in the region post-pandemic:
1. There has been a backsliding of democracies, with increase in human rights violations, censorship and surveillance particularly through digital technologies.
2. The pandemic proved to be opportunity for many states to increase surveillance – this has been done through unfiltered collection of data from health tracking applications, laws and policies that give states greater control over people’s data and the ability to obtain such data without regard to privacy and data protection norms and the use of spyware such as pegasus on activists, journalists and other dissidents. Governments are using public funds to purchase spyware from other countries to use on their citizens without any legal oversight or accountability.
3. Civic space online is shrinking along with an increase in censorship and arrests of citizens for online expression, particularly expression criticising the state.
4. Hate speech and misinformation online, targeting particular individuals and groups, is being used as a political weapon to influence public discourse and sway elections.
5. On the other hand, there is also a growing awareness among people, especially online and through the internet, of their rights, particularly with respect to privacy and their data.
6. Increasingly, people are using online spaces to discuss, mobilise and coordinate to fight for their rights and hold states accountable.
7. There is a need for an international recognition of this problem of digital authoritarianism and its rise in Asia, particularly as it pertains to sale and purchase of surveillance technologies by private companies to states and other entities.
8. There is also a need for strong data protection frameworks in countries across the region that not only protect internet users from private companies but also the collection and use of their data by the state.
Even though it’s a very good idea to help the people with lack of English skill to be able to access to internet easily but from my experience now people with lack of English skill still have the ability to access to the internet. For example if they want to search for the information there is a google app on the mobile phone. Both iOS and Android system have local language instruction. They don’t really remember what URL the website have all there care about is the tittle and short description on Google.
For the EAI, for Thailand. I have ask some of my friend and all of them never know about IDN and EAI and they are all don’t interested in having local language email or domain. If I have any chance to interview people from more rural area I will updated here.
The community-based network systems are still controversial among stakeholders but on the other hand, having those kinds of network systems can provide more Internet coverage areas. The huge digital divide among developed and developing countries is needed to reduce by collaborating and working together. Also, when the users have the right to connect online, Internet connectivity should be a human right. Multi-stakeholder have to be seriously considered for any kinds of human rights violations such as Internet shutdowns forwarding to the inclusion.
Climate Change is related to every nation. There is no Planet B according to the UN. So, both developing and developed countries need to collaborate for a green economy by means of looking forward to our future.
I think building information literacy skills is related to the interpretation of the local languages. When we are trying to empower people for building their trust and well-being through digital information literacy skills, using the local language cracked version learning and development materials are the most effective way to enhance these skills. On the other hand, the costly translation and interpretation are the challenges for it.
Awareness is the first step to advocate for people before implementing policy and regulations regarding the impacts of digitalization on climate change. When people are starting aware of it and understand its impacts, they will get involved in the implementation of the policy and regulations process for reducing the carbon footprints, especially, young people.
Efforts are required involving all stakeholders to make the Internet a safe space for all, including the voices of the minorities. Solutions to online harassment can take many forms, such as victims speaking out about their abuse, better community standards by social media companies, digital security precautions, self-help strategies, stricter laws, and better efforts by law enforcement agencies.
Algorithms form a basic part of data analysis and artificial intelligence. They are made by various entities in order to analyse data and make use of data for purposes such as profiling, showing targeted advertisements, showing relevant search results, as well as performing automated tasks such as those performed by self-driving cars.
Disclosure of algorithms can facilitate governments, researchers and the general public in understanding what kinds of data is used and how that data is used, leading to an increase in privacy awareness through openness and transparency.
Internet is not something which is created by single entity, it’s a wish, work and infrastructural development of every stakeholder, but unfortunately most of the Internet infrastructure is owned by private corporations rather than the civil society. Majority of Internet infrastructure is copyrighted. So it’s the responsibility of governing bodies to make the basic infrastructure which builds the Internet under the Open access and accessible to the public.
Since internet has become global, each and every citizen must have equal right to govern it and hence the share in internet governance must be proportionate to the concentration of global population.
In view of above para 28 requires changes
As World is struggling to develop an education system completely dependent on internet. we, as students, are being inculcated with a sense that internet is our new strength; as our future depends on it. However, we are and never in past were taught about internet ethics & ground rules. Educating about ground rules can not only solve hate speech but also encourage better use of social media platforms.
Utilising user’s data for business purpose might be economically beneficial but it is greatly putting people’s trust at risk. They feel monitored by technology. There is a common feeling among people that internet sells their personal data for the sake of economic benefits.
Till the date, in the remote areas of my country if a woman owns an electronic gadget its considered a taboo. People question their character just on the basis of owning it. Many girls were made to completely disconnect from education when pandemic started and education shifted to online grounds completely. Not just the girls, old people and even old teachers in school feel hesitated to teach on the internet and are made fun of for trying. They were thrown in the digital space without adequate assistance when pandemic started. Awaring people that Internet is not just a source of entertainment, but it is also a vast boundless medium for education sounds like the solution. But the question is how can internet educate people who don’t have access to it in the first place.
During the session, Gaya educated enough about violence on the internet. She mentioned a suitable approach on solving hate speech. As it is obvious that education is the biggest answer for solving hate speech on the internet so simply blocking one’s access from a particular social media platform for voilating the “terms and condition” isn’t enough. One needs to talk and educate that person and let them know how their words not just stay confined to solid grounds of technology but also reach a human just like them.
Lack of high speed internet in Kashmir has deprived many students of their basic right (education). Due to strict lockdown imposed on them way before the pandemic and the hampered internet connection before and even during the pandemic till date has affected their progress rate on the internet.
I agree with Art’s point here as well as his comment on the priority given to “ICT resilience to disasters”.
I’d also like to highlight a key differentiator between Access and the Ability to use. Maybe we can add a little line on digital literacy.
It’s also necessary to bring into the conversation sectors/people who may be the most affected if encryption is undermined e.g., financial/banking, journalists, etc.
By the looks of it, all 3 lines in the para need to be tweaked.
It may be worthwhile to consider changing this to something along the lines of:
“The issue of (digital?) inclusion is multi-dimensional in nature, and includes social, economic, technological, and human rights issues, amongst others.
Or “frontier technologies”?
There is a need to look beyond the basic (device-oriented) view of the impact of digital technologies, and look at the digital ecosystem as a whole. Specifically, the impact (and resource use) of delivering certain types of content across the whole chain. By way of example, one would expect streaming of a standard HD video to have less of an environmental impact than a 4k video. The question is, is it necessary to watch a dog chase it’s tail, or a cat play with a tennis ball, in 4k?
One of the concerns is that the “temporary” privacy intrusive apps, services, laws will become permanent.
As well, increasingly, there are issues around vaccine digital certificates and people wanting to view, have a copy in order to provide a service e.g. a gym wanting a copy of vaccine certificate on file before allowing you to work out. There are a number of issues such as these that don’t appear to have been thought through by authorities and businesses are required to enforce compliance by threat of fines if they allow unvaccinated customers.
Fundamentally, “digitally-led, inclusive growth” will be limited by availability and affordability of last mile/middle mile infrastructure + suitable devices + subscription plan (and data caps) + digital literacy + core Internet infrastructure such as IXPs, CDNs, etc. The absence, or reduced availability of these, will have a significant impact on what digital inclusion (and growth) can be achieved.
There is a need for policymakers (and this spans developed and developing countries) to urgently prioritise availabilty and affordability, in particular for rural areas, minority communities, PWDs and the underprivileged.
The statement section here should note the importance of protecting the right of users to secure communications and the role that encryption plays in that and ensuring digital security as a whole.
I don’t think there is unanimous consensus that the COE Convention on Cybercrime should always from the basis for national legal frameworks on this.
We should also explicitly note that legal frameworks in this area should build on the increasing international human rights law norms in this area, particularly those from the UN Special Rapporteurs on Free Speech, Privacy, and others, along with documents from the Human Rights Council such as General Comment 34 (on free expression under the ICCPR).
This theme of this workshop will also inspire informal meetings at LACIGF2017 and has also been addressed in the Dynamic Coalition on Publicness in the IGF2017.
Digital skills programs and initiatives should respond to local contexts which includes local languages, socio- cultural considerations, technology accessibility and challenges unique to disadvantaged groups.
Our messages have tendency to be too complex that an ordinary individual who have less exposure to technical contents and scholarly concepts. Transforming our message into understandable language for all can be of help. This can encourage more participation. It is a common knowledge that some segments of the local community are not confident to speak up. Creating ways to encourage them to speak up and tell their stories is a good start.
I totally agree Gunela. Developing meta cognitive skills is always an important component. Teaching them how to think and to understand the concepts rather than just giving them activities where they have a tendency to do rote memorization is really important. Those who are not comfortable with technology use are inclined to memorize. It defeats the purpose to innovate.
I have observed that the discussion and ICT development focuses on psychosocial disabilities? I suggest that the next forum with also tackle this issue. What are the assistive technologies to support this group?
– Broaden the ethics education (more to algorithm ethic) to engineer/ IT students to government because the universities or schools are officially recognized or by ministry of education in their own countries. Recommendation: The ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (“the Code”) expresses the conscience of the profession.
– Broaden/ categorize ethical issues , because this is not only computing that included. For example such as Product design, coding/programing, operational handling content because the data is from all background
– There are some countries which started to give regulation about crypto assets and some are not. We may need structured model for govern crypto assets because if we don’t have the model it will be difficult to define. But it’s also already provided by internet draft IETF before.
– For crypto assets governance, The Important point is the communication among business and engineers, It is not easy to solve but it’s important to start communicate each other.
– If there will be new crypto currency platform released, we should concern about the users and security, for example Libra from Facebook including WhatsApp, Instagram, and Messenger, targeted to be able to transact with Libra starting in early 2020. However, it is not yet clear whether the availability is simultaneous worldwide or gradually in several countries first. But the main point is where almost all Facebook and those social media users is in the youth categories, so It’s important for giving awareness and education and comprehensive information about cryptocurrency in our communities
– There are a lot of methods of AI, IoT and IT Technologies. The importance is what is the real definition of ethics, and what are ethics for coders and we have to concern that if ethic definition always changing
– Innovation is important, as well as innovation of permission while maintaining algorithm accountability
– Building communities that can help the programmer/ future developers and engineers after graduation maintain of algorithm ethics of the behind computing machine
WS37. Is e-Government an effective mechanism for developing economies
– People need simple, fluent, integrates e-government services or we could state that importance of basic info needs first to support life capabilities. The thing to need attention while constructing E-government is there must be right people or who understand the functions of social institutions and society. Besides, we have to see what must be caught such as emerging trends and issues. For example, in the Pacific, the most important thing is to have a connection. Even though there are connections but still limited and few. and it should be noted that there are still few people working on the ICT. E-government is capable of work with ICT companies in their respective regions to achieve effective e-governance and digital economic growth. If it has already been implemented, the most important thing is to increase securities in the system / app in e-government because using a real name system, we can conclude ideally is the resilience of and sustainable system.
– Fiji 5 Years transformation online. Digital transformation program to bring government services online, such as online record of birth, death and marriage, business and company registration, etc.
– In Indonesia, for example of government applications in education sector are government library app which we could rent e-book from this app, public school enrollment can be done online for junior and senior high school level. In health sector, there is Online Self registration in the public hospitals to make an appointment with doctor, etc.
– For those who have just started an e-government website, for example, several countries in the Pacific island can be made with recommendations from several websites from other countries and analyze what features which must to have, good to have or not particularly, Examples for must to have are main news page, weather forecast, focus on tourism (by occupation) simplify the website topics, sign up and log in, Message us, Contact, FAQ, Health topics, search engine. For good to have are Education sites, Every Drop Counts, Text to speech for disability people, Social Media, E-services of government information.
• WS9. Parallel Workshop: Build Concept on AI and Society for good Global
The concept from academic aspect is the curriculum that could influence learning process of building concept on AI, maybe only some countries in Asia Pacific have implemented it, but not at all and now starting to be implemented.
The awareness methods could be formal and informal training. For examples of formal training are such as open online class and supplement lesson. For informal training from tutorials or videos on internet that we can access by our self and make group of club to give this knowledge.
AI is not the new things for programmer, therefore to deepen practices on developing AI products, they should more explore and take the initiatives to be professionals and not only depend to the lessons in the universities. the result that can be achieved for example such as competition that could maximize their knowledge which they already receive at class and school, and the integral projects which can give the best solutions towards Sustainable Development Goals and some kind of issues such as poverty and disaster recovery and others.
As we know AI helps economic and industry sectors more convenience in advertising and analyzing the data. It could be said that machine learning and open data will help global system development. This world is AI lace but not all countries pay attention about inclusion problem, we need to focus on AI economies and we have to improve security and privacy protection.
WS22. IoT Security – A Differentiator for Consumers
– Based on some reports and news, there are some IoT Technologies which are not implement strong security. that are compromised by hackers even as homes and businesses continue to add these and other connected devices to their networks and it was realized that most challenges were of privacy/confidentiality and data integrity. Based on those issues, the companies should improve from layer security, framework and platform devices.
– There is the fact that innovation of IoT products could help people with disability but we also have to concern about the security and who will be responsible for facilitate this concern
– The raising awareness about security in IoT. At least consumers understanding about what data will they give, term and agreements with the IoT services and strengthen transparency accountability of IoT manufacturers about information of their IoT Products and integrity .
– There is no real regulation about differentiator for customer on IoT, bringing companies to participate/ involve or maybe it would be better if they had a common framework. The movement that we can do is work together
I’d add the importance of an overarching policy framework for supporting digital inclusion.
See section 4 of this document published during APrIGF, where we propose guidelines for policy response:
• a collaborative policy framework focused on an enabling digital environment
• investing in digital infrastructure to expand internet access and affordability
• promoting digital skills at all levels to close inequality gaps
• raising awareness of online risks to take full advantage of connectivity
• supporting adoption and innovation policies to take full advantage of digitalization
The integration of marginalized communities does not end with Internet connectivity and providing access to new digital tools, such as e-commerce. Inclusion means benefiting from digitalization in all its dimensions, not only as end users. With appropriate policies and a local-based approach focusing on marginalized communities’ needs, innovation can flourish, and digitalization can spur local entrepreneurs and startups, multiplying the economic impact in the communities.
Underserved communities face market access challenges and lack access to financial tools to support local entrepreneurship. Moreover, local nuances, language barriers, and cultural and behavioral issues make digital adoption and entrepreneurship particularly challenging and context-based. These adoption constraints can be minimized when digital solutions are developed within the community and by local entrepreneurs. People from underserved communities are talented and innovators, and they can solve the digital adoption challenges if appropriate policies and market incentives are provided.
The constraints for digital adoption are particularly expressed among indigenous people’s communities, where the lack of context-based solutions from some apps does not match with the societal cosmovision of the communities. For example, the relevance of a long-term intergenerational view to define the present, the lack of apps in local languages, or the underlying biases in new AI developments. Biases are embedded in the technologies, and they will persist unless marginalized communities are part of the entrepreneurship ecosystem.
Finally, the digital tool itself can promote inclusion. For example, apps can help women entrepreneurs in underserved communities to avoid the “middleman” market power issue by connecting them with new markets. But these cases will only be sustainable if there is a long-term commitment to expand access, spur competition, and take into account local voices.
Following topics are also suggested
– Investigation and prosecution
There are mutual legal assistance agreements ( MLATs) signed between countries which helps to investigate and prosecute cyber crimes. But the process is very cumbersome. What is the possibility of having a cyber crime convention at least for the AP region, with less complex procedures?
– Respect to cultural differences
Privacy levels may depend on cultures. In the AP region culture is different than EU and USA. It is very difficult to deal with privacy violations of AP citizens, with the privacy policies of EU and USA based organizations.
Also we have to consider the security issues which may arise due to Internet of Things. The suggestion of the meeting was security issues should be addressed from the phase of designing the devices.
Collaboration to mitigate and prevent cyber security incidents within the region of AP and in a global level is a must.
This section should NOT be removed. The Internet content for AP region is mostly from US and EU. But when there is a matter about privacy they refer their privacy policies developed on their culture. Sometimes a privacy violation according to our culture, does not align with their policy and hence they do not consider and take action.
The selected sessions did not have enough and pronounced coverage of gender or sexuality as a topic that intersects with Internet governance issues, digital rights etc. The UN IGF has a Gender BPF (Best Practices Forum). The APrIGF could possibly consider a gender thematic track or BPF.
Several human rights were derogated and continue to be derogated by governments in different countries across the world in order to control the Covid-19 pandemic and ensure the fundamental right to health and life. The derogated rights include but are not limited to the right to peaceful assembly, the right to peaceful protest, the right to privacy, freedom of movement and residence, the right to work, and the right to education. These rights were affected by lockdowns, travel restrictions, restrictions on movement, quarantine requirements, the closure of workplaces, schools and sites of economic activity, among other things.
In many cases, governments contracted/ collaborated with or relied on private companies to develop, operate, or repurpose technological interventions that were expected to help contain the spread of the disease. Many of these interventions were existing technological products meant for mass surveillance, the prevention or control of crime and the enforcement of security. Some businesses adopted technological measures internally in their workplaces and sites in order to contain the disease and ensure smooth operations.
Businesses are required to respect human rights. Thus, they should be mindful of the human rights that are affected by the interventions, services and products that they design, produce, implement or operate.
Gender based violence not only women and child also affected socially marginalized groups.
This could suggest that APrIGF is in favor of regulating the social media? Is that a factual position?
Suggest adding a question as below:
Can we deploy technology based innovative tools to identify and label disinformation/misinformation to attempt prevention rather than damage control?
Suggest adding the following question:
How can APrIGF contribute in building capacity on digital skills for the unserved and underserved?
Listing these disparities would be helpful to analyze and recommend solutions. Specificity would help in discussion and resolution.
The context of poor design may be explained to get the attention of the designers’ of technology platforms. Does the expression ‘poor design’ refer to lack of compliance and conformance to widely accepted international specifications and standards?
to ultimately advance the IG development in the AP region “and promote a progressive discourse on IG in the region”
effective and “meaningful”
And updating gender blind policies
neglected and marginalized communities
I think it’d be good to emphasize that CP not just helps create awareness but also gives agency to the users
human rights activists
Can we also include people with disabilities as well as other groups of people who have specific challenges and needs that need to be incorporated into IG?
[to address violations]
and in some instances to restrict freedom of expression and suppress dissent.
[the protection of children and youth online]
And also indicate that capacities of children and young people should be strengthened so that the approach is not entirely protectionist and gives agency to the users as well.
Especially through the use of blanket provisions such as “in the interest of National Security”.
I think it’s fine for it to be at the bottom. The SDGs are weak in accountability mechanisms and are not centered in human rights language so it’s fine to mention it later in the para.
Can we explicitly mention ICESCR, ICCPR and CEDAW?
[The application of human rights should also consider issues of gender, disability, age and sexuality]
Are there concrete suggestions for this?
women and girls
Women are not a homogenous group and their access to technology is affected by a number of other factors such as age, class, caste, race, ethnicity, income, culture, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, abilities, urban or rural locality, etc. Therefore, women have to overcome multiple discriminations in order to gain access. These include, but are not limited to, the high cost of devices, the high cost of connectivity, lack of infrastructure, social, cultural and religious norms and restrictions, geographical location, language barriers, etc. Even when they overcome some of those barriers, often women and girls’ increased access to the Internet is directly proportional the increase of violence against women online (http://www.genderit.org/sites/default/upload/issue_womenrights_digital.pdf)
[through a range of strategies]
Including addressing the structural causes of violence
Nepal – Laws around online gender-based violence and freedom of expression are often protectionist and based on the idea of “lurking” and ambiguous threats, not focused on respecting and upholding human rights. Those in power decide they are the protectors and also decide who/what needs protecting and what society needs protection from. We need to further examine the importance we put on legal responses and our perspective of them as “unbiased”.
Malaysia – We need to question the logic of algorithms that propel social media spaces and demand transparency. We need to demand for human rights compliance within the design of tech companies, systems and business model itself, not just for piecemeal approaches.
Taiwan – Our governments often regard the online space as a tangible space with potential perpetrators and victims, with the government as a third party, as enforcers and protectors. The reality of the digital space however means that very few countries have governments that can implement full authoritative power over social media spaces and companies. These platforms are maintained by private entities and the power of governments over them vary in different contexts. It is often not clear the ways governments and platform companies work together to censor what we do online.
Sri Lanka – Content moderation is the online version of our laws – they really don’t do anything to stop the problem but targets individuals. Social media intermediaries and platforms will censort female nipples, nudity, “I hate men” but there is very little moderation or urgency about transphobia, usage of sensational content for clickbait, misogynist speech, hate speech. None of that is registered as “obscene”, those propagating this “obscene” content are not seen as being in the wrong. There’s a need for people and especially the platforms, to reevaluate what we think of as violence and what moderation of dangerous speech would entail.
Way forward – We need to review what justice can actually mean on a space as complicated as the internet.
In addition in 2018, the High Level Political Forum at the UN HQ in New York will be an opportunity for the National Regional IGF Initiatives (NRIs) to showcase how this is achieved on a practical level around the world.
On the issue of Access. there are a host of organizations who are involved across the multistakeholder environment who deal with “Access”. At the WSIS 2017, Chinese Multinational Corporations such as Huawei presented on how they intend to connect the next billion. You have IGOs that have diverse strategies on bridging the digital divide but what we want to do is (in IGF fashion) allow for the opportunity to synergize efforts to bring development whether at policy level, infrastructure level, technical standards, innovation at the edge etc. Asia Pacific is on the cutting edge of development with crypto banks in Malaysia, and Indonesia happens to be chair of the UN 2nd Committee which looks after the Addis Ababa Agenda which was passed by the UNGA. However with Accessibility there are issues of inclusion and threats that come with growing Access which require mitigation.
China has recently introduced law banning VPNs which pose as a threat to freedom of expression or freedom from surveillance by the State. Other countries have for years attempted to stifle accessibility by internet shutdowns and we have seen this in the deliberate throttling of the internet in Iran, internet shutdowns in countries like Pakistan, attempted banning of You Tube and Facebook etc in other countries.
Countries are not obliged to respect international law only those which they have ratified. We cannot impose they respect the conventions. But what needs to happen is that the NRIs are afforded a unique opportunity to dialogue within their communities and advocate for an open and free internet. However, something that has been missing are international minimum standards that the global community can agree to abide by in diverse areas including but not limited to privacy, data protection, surveillance, inclusivity etc.
The jump from para 12 to para 13 is disjointed. Para 13 is clearly referring to cyber crime. There should be mention on the need for Digital or Electronic Evidence rules, issues of admissibility, uniform timestamping protocols, judicial training etc.
I mentioned something on Privacy in a previous comment in relation to the banning of VPNs in China…etc. There was also discussion in the remote chat during the APrIGF about the need to regulate agreements and create international minimum standards. For instance telcos and providers at the edge or OTT onsell customer information etc. So it’s not just government doing surveillance but private sector as well. The NRIs are well positioned to foster and engage in dialogue in the macro APrIGF level as well as in their respective jurisdictions to engage in elaborate discussion.
Civil society in parts of this region have been politically inclined or funded by the donor agencies in line with their interests. Terms like ” resilient” is only used to the community which are “vulnerable”. Shrinking civil space in these contexts is due to fragmented civil society, which lack the a non biased position and independent views. Keeping civil society independent is a gargantuan task in developing Asian countries.
These is an urgent need of proper “digital workers union” which will make gig economy fair. In many countries, gig workers outnumber other workers(civil services, army, police, doctors, government workers) combined. A model which is balanced between service, sharing and sustenance should be discussed.
Access to the internet is the major issue. This is a confusing topic.2.9 billion which makes 37 percent of the world population still have no access. As envisioned by SDG target 9.c clearly states in the “increase access to information and communication technologies and strive to provide universal and affordable access to the internet in least developed countries by 2020”. But many are still left behind. In not just internet technologies help achieve SDGs, but SDG ensures everyone has access first. Both work on symbiosis.
These technologies which have been deployed by the government during the pandemic have mostly been instituted, and now are thriving to be used for other purposes. This is a great danger. The Covid -19 also created a race amongst governments in Asia, to embark into digital authoritarianism.
I don’t know if “regulation” is the right term and I do not see in anyway todays social media can be regulated by a government or in this case election commission. In case of paid contents for campaigning, the start can be to label them well as political media content and clearly term them as info-advertisements. The election commissions/ election bodies should be willing to deploy “digital election observers” to monitor the content.
I want to raise the dilemma that I as a consumer face on a daily basis. While I would like to use local, smaller vendors for their online services so that the bigger corporate giants do not form a monopoly, I am also aware that these small vendors might not be able to keep my data as secure as the bigger companies could. This is a conflict, and I would love for the community to come up with a way to resolve this issue.
This is a stage we can appreciate and manage the internet and its resources for a better use.
There are alot of diversities with the internet but all works for our advantage if we know just how and when to use it.
We cannot forget the stone age, centuries ago where thinking level was just sifficient for that era and in this age we need something very admirable and that can make us discover the future. The internet is its name and it has its starting point.
Evolution is caused by thinking change that will effect the human race. The internet has totally brought change that has affected the way we dress, behave and think; what of the way we learn? it is drastically changing. Notwithstanding we need a way of curbing its consequencies to work for our good at all times.
The ineternet has provided a platform to commit subtle crime, more secretive more conscious, yet it has not changed our uniqueness as humanbeigns.
I really appreciate the topic for the 2015 and hope it serves even a better purpose to grass root local communities around the continent and the world to be a tool that gives sound information and not to create a decadence in moral statndard.
Therefore we think it is important to build bridges with the trade negotiators and increase their understanding of the technology and the far-reaching implications of these rules. Users and the technical community have not been sufficiently involved in this trade rule-making process on these issues, their voice should be heard (for example via effective stakeholder consultations) and their concerns taken into account. Better engagement of these underrepresented communities is needed in these processes.
Governments need to balance many considerations (not just free flow of data for innovation) including the need to require data to be stored locally for a number of reasons including: to investigate tax evasion (eg New Zealand), for privacy (eg Australia), to be able to do timely and effective financial regulation the way the USA couldn’t during the 2008 financial crisis because some Lehman Brothers data was stored in Hong Kong etc.
Given the current ecommerce proposals being negotiated at the World Trade Organization (WTO), it makes more sense to replace ‘How can they be harmoniously combined with the existing global trade regimes’? with ‘What are the implications of the international trade rules currently being negotiated in the name of ‘ecommerce’ on the ability to regulate these technologies and development more broadly?’
Partnership, collaboration and knowledge sharing in digital media and information literacy literacy between libraries and other organisations from public, private and people sectors are essential to widen the reach and deepen the understanding of the ever changing information landscape.
“Open Access and Spectrum for Wifi for Development” sounds a bit confusing….can it be changed to “Open Access to Frequency and Spectrum for Development” as mentioned in the text ?
Should we not expand EAI (Email Address Internationalization) somewhere, either in the bullet or in the text?
Since it is the script that is internationalized (and not necessarily the language), should the last part be “…so people can connect using their own script”?
“…and how these can help provide a trusted environment for the adoption and use of the Internet” in the first line. What does “these” refer to?
Not sure what transpired during discussions, but this item appears to be somewhat unusual in the context of Internet Governance. It would be valid to retain this if any of the participating countries (especially the bigger ones) did make a demand for a second currency.
Second sentence: “broadband consultations” or “broad-based consultations” ?
I’d suggest the following additional theme:
– Sustaining Diversity
In the movement towards including the Next Billion, it is important to provide for explicit measures to support and conserve existing diversity: linguistic (spoken languages & scripts); cultural; ethnic; and even biological/ecological)
While the subthemes are well developed, there appeared to be a bit of disconnect in relating the sub-themes to the main theme of “Merging Physical Space with Cyberspace”.
Should we make “…measures to support and conserve existing diversity…” to “…measures to support, conserve and enhance existing diversity…” ?
Can we mention Universal Acceptance together with IDNs and EAI? In fact, if we are mentioning IDNs, then IDNs and Universal Acceptance may be sufficient.
Towards the end of the paragraph, I’d suggest the following sentence:
In the case of SIGs, Asia-Pacific has made major strides through multiple regional, subregional and national initiatives including APSIG, MEAC-SIG, inSIG, pkSIG and APIGA. Nevertheless, there is still more effort required in underserved areas of Asia-Pacific.
Recommend “…Disruptive innovations such as the Blockchain…”
Also, in the fourth line from the bottom, the reference to “prohibition…as well as source code disclosure” is unclear. As stated, this is anti-open source, which may be an issue with several parts of the community. Not sure if this was expressly stated in any session…if not, it’s best it’s redacted.
Finally, the sentiment against data localization (somewhat understandable in terms of possible inhibition of free flow of data) is also problematic, as local communities may prefer data in local languages and formats.
Doesn’t it have legal dimensions as well?
To clarify, diversity is often enforced through the law.
There are formidable challenges that newcomers face in joining global, regional, and national Internet Governance processes. Schools on Internet Governance (SIGs) provide one of the most effective means of onboarding new talent and making them participate effectively in Internet Governance.
The COVID-19 pandemic has hit most SIGs adversely, whereas a few have taken on the challenge of continuing to operate as earlier although this option was more expensive. Other schools have decided to go virtual, leading to compressed schedules and reduced interactions among participants (which is an important consideration in creating a community of alumni). Some schools have adopted innovations to overcome some of these challenges, including “Meet-and-greet” sessions for Fellows, and inter-sessional lectures for covering specific topics in depth. The pandemic has also seen the creation of a fully virtual SIG targeted at global audiences.
Some SIGs that used extensively interactive methodologies (such as simulating multistakeholder processes) have been forced to adopt different methodologies including closer integration with actual IG events.
The COVID-19 pandemic has made the Internet indispensable for the day-to-day lives of people. The breadth and depth of the use of the Internet call for greater participation by all stakeholders in the governance of the Internet. The role of SIGs are therefore even more important in the post-COVID-19 world.
In the phrase “be available in all languages…”, can we include scripts as well? (“be available in all languages and scripts…”)
[Privacy by design needs to be emphasized along with informed consent]
The sentence needs to end here.
[safeguard collection and use of personal data]
“…safeguard the collection and use of personal data” ?
[beckons for reliable,]
Non-standard usage? “Calls for” may be more appropriate.
[Internet shutdowns and restrictions are detrimental to the freedom of expression and right of universal access to Internet.]
Internet shutdowns also have a significant detrimental impact on the economic/commercial use of the Internet. I wonder if this aspect should also find a place.
[have the potential to redesign our interactions ]
“redesign” is too mild for what these technologies can do…”transform” may be more appropriate.
Child-Led research by 22 amazing guangzhou young delegate (upper primary school age). They research over 8 chinese cities of children perspective. Comprising of quantitative and qualitative data.
3 key takeaways.
1. Mental health component in Internet Governance IG issues are intertwined with social issues. Safer internet, cybersecurity & regulation. Qualitative case example cited by young delegate, child commit suicide as parent confiscate their phone. Mental wellness need to be address via education and also Multistakeholder approach.
2. Need for evidence-based practice, this child-led research is an example whereby such research can be utilize for professionals whether from internet governance or relevant field that works with children such as social worker.
3. Child perspective must be balance with adult perspective that promotes the welfare and wellness of the child in Safer internet, cybersecurity & regulation.
Agree on this point. Not only the youth, but the elderly are also important to have good knowledge and awareness about cybersecurity, cyberbullying, fake news, hate speeches, etc. and all the things that can be dangerous via the internet.
For instance, a gullible person may be both a youth or middle-aged and even an elderly who is used to believe the occurrences on the internet and spread the news about it which can harm someone direct or indirect way by emotionally, financially, socially, and reputationally.
Therefore, the elderly should be added too in the discussion of Internet Governance so they become familiar with both the advantages and disadvantages of the internet and how to protect themselves. And we are able to realize their perceptive of using the internet and lessons learned in order to have the idea how we should better promote the awareness of Internet Governance for all age level.
More people need to be encouraged to participate in Youth IGF and fellowship programs.
Many IG-related contents have limitations in obtaining information to the general public just because it is English. In order to promote public awareness of IG, Youth IGF should also play a role in translating and delivering IG issues into each country’s language.
Plus, fellowship programs also require the participation of more diverse countries. In particular, it would be nice to bring countries that can share their know-how and skills to newcomers about Internet governance and share detailed ideas and technologies among fellows. The more good examples there are, the more countries will think about how to apply them to their countries (although it is also important that they provide ideas that newcomers can apply!)
The reason why the number of hacking cases at medical institutions has increased rapidly is that telemedicine and non-face-to-face treatment have been applied.
Through new intermediate routes such as applications and wearable devices, both patients and hospital officials can easily access hospital information, increasing the number of gaps that can penetrate security.
Unlike companies, medical institutions have information that must be protected called personal medical records, so it is important to establish a systematic security system.
Hospital managers should strengthen the security system in consideration of the importance of patient information, even at costs, and medical workers should also get training to comply with security-related rules.
What is the private sector doing specifically to do this?
One of the typical ways to deal with fake news is fact-checking. After the fake news is generated, the fact-checking process checks whether the fake news is true or not and informs. Fact-checking is a necessary process for Internet users as well as news producers and online media that deliver the news. This is because after the actual fake news is generated and spread, it spreads to many the general public before it becomes a fact check(←It’s too slow!). Therefore, when the public read news, it is necessary to have a habit of neutralizing the information that the news delivers and looking for follow-up articles or other media materials.
In addition, it is necessary to actively identify fake news so that other Internet users can identify the authenticity of the information through “interaction functions” such as comments and reporting when they encounter information that is difficult to trust.
Rising awareness among developing countries nation’s most important then introducing policy framework. In many cases have seen for example in Bangladesh they didn’t know using social media they’re doing crime. Policy and regulations will be much more effective only when everyone have good understanding of right or wrong on the internet.
With the trend of Digital ecosystem facilities us doing e-commerce, online shopping,mobile money transfer…etc. on the other hand consumers are not have adequate knowledge of rights, there’s products received found not satisfy quality thts has been assured by the e-commerce platform and most of the case they didn’t mentioned penalty or they have tendency to overlook it as result consumers are loosing better service.
Though have rising digital economy through digital services or platform but have huge lack of digital governance for which end user can be beneficial for the developing countries.
Computing machines or machine learning algorithm should be free from biased. However considering diversity of data in algorithm can provide machine to take right decisions. Inclusion of ethics and norms programmer or Innovator can direct a machine from wrong to right.however besides those, need good human centric principles and morality to address awareness behind computing machines.
Network shutdown is common phenomenon in the Asia Pacific specially in developing countries where nation’s are really not aware of there right, it seems government is all in all to dominate people’s freedom of speech over online.
They don’t bother to shut whole internet though have high impact of digital economy . To overcome this barrier combined voice and collaborative effort like isp, Telco,human rights, end users should raise voice to stop this bad practices. Internet governance should regulate participating all stakeholders, not only by government however criticism of those practice may reduce shut down issues.
Stackholder concern may focus on accountability could lead to a top-down rather than bottom-up framing for a partnership. Also need to focus on realities on the ground and to build space for listening and dialogue. However multilateralism it is seen as an attractive alternative. particularly in the corporate world,
multistakeholder governance as offering a more direct hand and poten-tially a legitimate role in national and global governance. Most important to identify dentiﬁes gaps and limitations in governance and questions the illusion of democracy and participation.
Use of e-governance can make public administration fast and effective, provide better services, and respond to the demands of transparency and accountability.
E-governance stimulates economic growth and promotes social inclusion of disabled and vulnerable sections of society.
E-governance can provide benefits in the form of new employment, better health, better education, knowledge sharing, skills developments and capacity building for sustainable development.
Overall Quick and fast e-services eliminate middlemen and save both time and money.
Add text in support of encryption – encourage setting encryption standards as per global standards- without any maximum limit.
Where referring to private sectors to come up with connectivity initiatives/solution, add text “support innovative business models”.
Can there be another section specifically on internet blocks? Suggested text: “Shutdown, throttling, and other disruptions of the internet or of a subset of websites, apps, and services are deeply concerning as they have tremendous, negative economic and social consequences. Governments must adhere to their international human rights commitments and ensure that any restrictions on freedom of expression—including disruptions of internet service—meet the thresholds of legality, necessity, and proportionality set out in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”.
In Asia Pacific, majority of the connection is via mobile phone. There is a different quality of accessing meaningfully the Internet via laptop or PC versus via mobile phone. The early adopter countries –which have access to Internet way before others– started their connection via cable and PC. The quality of accessing Internet via mobile phone, certainly has more limited quality.
It would be good to have specific intervention on how to make mobile access Internet better engaged with people.
Technology is not working in vacuum, the same with Internet. It depends on many factors and how you connect is also important.
The COVID-19 period (2020-2021) was of one a difficult time for everyone. But for disabled students, it was quite challenging to get digital education. As in India most of the rural areas are still not having good internet connectivity due to weak signals and lots of students’ families can’t afford a smartphone and data charges as well. Apart from this, there are other issues also such as lack of direct supervision to use of the online learning platform and video conferencing applications. If students are new to these this will be a problem for them. The main problem was with the students having hearing disabilities as at that time the captioning support was limited on video conferencing apps. Moreover learning management systems were challenging for visually impaired students to use and lacked descriptions for instructive images in teaching notes.
The applicability of international human rights instruments and conventions has been in conflict with the traditional idea of sovereignty. It would definitely give a stronger clarity if we could clearly state the usage of “human rights” and “ethics” so the conflict and confusion can be avoided in the future.
The express use of ‘Privacy by design’ can go a long way in giving a proper direction to the SMEs and Start-ups in relation to their technological innovations. Especially since the SME’s are predominant in the Global South and Privacy and Protection are not given due importance in the design process as compared to the Global North.
The idea of ‘barefoot engineering’ has been gaining popularity in current times. Under this the ICT companies use their Corporate Social Responsibility funds to train youth; consequently, absorbing them in company activities and creating new employment opportunities. This creates a positive cycle of digital literacy and employment which can be used to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
Diversity and inclusion through law can have a range of unintended consequences, hence a mechanism where the organisations are incentivised to promote diversity on their own will work more efficiently.
The balance between the fundamental freedom of speech and expression has to be balanced in view of the violence and harms caused due to the actions of people through intermediaries. Stringent enforcement of laws relating to classification and elimination of fake news will go a long way in ensuring that the safety of citizens are protected while also maintaining the intermediary liability of the major online spaces.
There is a serious lack of awareness among the law makers as well as the citizenry about the importance of an Encrypted internet. Hence the APAC lens needs to focus on encryption literacy to provide knowledge to make informed decisions regarding encryption. Simplifying the encryption debate to make it non- technical and easier for the common person to understand will go a long way in protecting the E2E in the APAC region.
The suggestions regarding the inclusion of the alumni who have worked and contributed to making IG inclusive and paced way for the intergenerational dialogue can be included in this section. Additionally the suggestions made during the launch of ORBIT and making an alumni portal to share information and learn from peers can be encouraged in this section.
One key feature to ensure inclusion and empowerment of new voices is to break the concepts and major IG issues into small and easy chunks which can be understood by beginners, overcomplicating the content can only result in confusion and will deter many of the new young community members to participate in these IG spaces.
UNICEF is currently holding one of the most important education and literacy-based conference, maybe having an inter-organizational dialogue with them could help advance the solutions to ensure that digital -education and digital-literacy grow faster and are able to reach the last mile.
The issues that were highlighted in terms of unintentional inequities that subsist in the jobs and workplaces during the session can be included in this section.
The talk by Tobias on “An Internet for a ‘Burning World’ featured some of the key concerns raised in these sections and the propositions given by him along with the potential solutions could form a part of the follow through and the best practices to be adopted in the future.
Jaewon’s talk on Eco-Internet along with the solutions that were suggested becomes especially important. A section highlighting the ways in which the community can help resolve the environmental concerns can be added to this section. (For example: the deletion of the spam emails and the advertisement emails)
The report and the discussion by Mr. Edmond Chung needs to be highlighted and the ways in which the report can help the youth community to become more conscious and aware of their environmental impact needs to be brought to the forefront.
During the explanation and discussion by Loraine whilst explaining about Columbia’s ‘threadneedle’ session, we saw the same question being asked to the expert and the unequivocal response was ‘NO’ that businesses and concerns for human rights are not at odds with each other, instead they supplement one another to grow together. It was also highlighted that the companies do not even have to settle for lower profits. The questions raised by Gayatri and the answers by Loraine become especially important in the context of discussion in this section.
Especially in Asia Pacific the level of information in terms of disinformation is very less. Social media has been used as a tool of communication and has been bombarded with information both relevant and irrelevant. In both the case there is a threat of the vulnerable group. Trust Factor in internet was always limited as there was limited participation and recognition of inclusion. The Trust is growing with the mutlistakeholder approach where inclusion and diversity play a crucial role in the adaptation and mitigation process
Inclusion means to leave no one behind, everybody have a say everybody have the accessibility, no matter of which region they belong and which geographical place as there can be no boundaries when it comes to inclusivity
In this world where by almost everyone even the kids make utilisation of internet for education or entertainment purpose, and especially in case of pandemic where by people spend most of the time with smart phones and internet, it become very important to teach kids that what is important and what is unnecessarily things available in the internet to protect them and their mind from the things present in the internet which should be out of reach of children. For this purpose training must be given to the parents or the guardians that how they can teach their wards and in school curriculum also this subject must be added
This paragraph needs to be removed, or if it is to be rephrased, should be done without having ‘culture’ as the basis to mould laws and its implementation.
about IGF program theirs have some lack of content it’s not empowering the new voice at some point. The new voice could be others gender, youths, clans, or other ethics in AP. It looks like the speaker or guest talked only about their problem and hide the other important bigger point behind them. In AP should be floors for multi-gender to voice our AP region problems that relate to everyone and a floor for other problems for members to be interested or summarize session with multi-translator language that is popular in our region or a volunteer to help to translate for others people is the new voice has no English learning background to discuss Internet Governance In their country and can speak or voice to other people in our region. I think it’s time to do a bit bigger to represent our APrIGF to other regions
The future of work is a new generation of work is people nearly approve it like in-person work. A speaker talked about Korean platform ‘Webtoon’, this platform is famous in many countries in the Asia Pacific, and a lot of series sign contracts for making a series from webtoon comics. Unfortunately, I don’t hear a lot of voices about an online worker’s union to protect their people. A week ago, it’s news from our online creative community about a female artist, that an artist has missed a miscarriage because of a lot of work, the platform she work with didn’t take an action and the reader still asked her back to work to draw again. I hope next time we will discuss how we can protect online workers in the Asia Pacific and Islands region.
Some people these days don’t look after other issues. They concern only what issue they want to publish, that is why “Censorship” is so important because it helps people evenly, a child, a youth, an adult, an elderly including someone with health issues. As you know, disinformation, or waste thread information has become one of the biggest threats to trust on the internet, not only during the COVID-19 pandemic. It can attack everyone even if you have a good mental health condition. Moreover, most of the countries in the world have their own digital literacy and censorship related to their culture.
I have a lot of discussions about disclaimer, trigger warning, content warning and read this thread a lot in one of my communities. Even if we send our ID to check the age, they still ban the word or use moral light ( light of censor or something you use for censorship) to censor Adult content, in the way you can’t see anything but only the formal word and asterisk or star. to expand, they said some children used their parent ID. Is it OK to chase some content to an underground content? My artist friends use other openmind online legal websites to share or sell their drawing, their Artworks, their comic instread. That is the problem, we didn’t track or know which content the child sees after our back if we throw it out. If we have to concern and set the proper rate or gain the knowledge of what is the proper content with censorship, It will make online content better
Since the COVID-19 started, people have used the internet to find everything they are interested in. They have an online community, that is normal when people communicate or participate in issues with other people in the community, everything is starting. Online harassment can happen in every inch of the world and still happens in everyone’s lives. It’s not about women or gender diversity, it still happens in child, youth, and men’s lives. harassment can change to the crimes but our trustworthy, Is it the one way truth to addressing others because of the issues? harassment still happens since people alive, that is why addressing and strict law is not the way to change people’s habits. It’s late but not the last chance to educate people by using knowledge from around the world because in our Asia Pacific region, we still have a poor, uneducated area. All of us can access technology but they don’t understand the diversity of people around the world in the humanities situation. That is why harassment is a crime these days with a strict law that is not powerful or has no meaning law.
Internet Governance participants could consider Core Internet values as a set of values that the Internet ought not to slip away from. The architectural values – Internet as dumb technology, end to end architecture, inter-operability and openness – values arising out of the Internet’s design by the intent of the early inventors and the natural evolution of the Internet beyond their intent- could be deemed as unalterable core values. The underlying technical values result in larger sociological benefits. For instance the technical value of interoperability results in the sociological benefit of a Global Network of networks. The architectural values of openness and interoperability make the Internet as a Network of networks that require little architectural changes when a new network joins the Internet, or even when there are unforeseen technological developments such as Mobile Networks or unforeseen trends such as IPv6 or the proliferation of the Internet of Things. There are threats to the border-less Internet arising out of geographical borders raised by Governments as well as artificial borders raised by walled gardens and zero rating services. The IGF in its discussion on the horizontal theme of “Policy Options for connecting the next billion” could debate and emphasize that the stakeholders around the world formulate Internet Policy without hurting the core Internet Values.
I don’t think it should be removed since differences in cultural norms need to be acknowledged. But I agree with Gayatri’s framing, that regardless of these norms, the right to privacy must meet international standards.
I like the fact that you have explained the reason for maintaining international standards in right to privacy. Perhaps we can include a line from here on cross-border data transfer with what Gayatri has suggested?
If you omit to the next track in a playlist, Google Play
Music will slide in with the new track info before receding in to the track record.
If someone message or calls you, their contact picture and name will arrive until you answer.
Interesting comment on human rights framework-based design, would like to see the distinction between human-centred design versus human rights framework-based design (if any)
A point highlighted was the need for stronger legal mechanisms, wondering if this means potentially adopting already present and considered “stronger” framework like EU GDPR, and if so would the contextual differences be reflected in the new mechanisms.
Under some countries which reach relative gender equality but the application of the IG related events are male/female dominating, it may not be appropriate to try to balance the amount of male/female. Since the real problem is in the awareness of the IG or other reasons, we should raise the awareness of the people instead of creating the the illusion of the gender diversity.
The encryption technology is thus a controversial point which needs to further discuss. To what extent should this encryption apply to our communication? How can we fight against the hate speech, fake news, child pornography etc if these are circulating in the encryption personal message? If there is cybercrime in the encryption message, can government intervene in and get the encryption key? If the cybercrime is cross-countries, how do governments battle against it and sustain the freedom of speech online?
Before adding the new stakeholder in the discussion of Internet governance, we should consider its uniqueness and the urgency to include them. Different subthemes under the Internet governance may show the different level of uniqueness and urgency to include them in the discussion. For example, in the access and universality session, the urgency to include the different social status people may outweigh the urgency to include the elderly. As the technology is evolving, there should also be consecutive research focusing on which potential stakeholders are lagging behind. In different issues, there would be different stakeholders we need to focus on more. How to build up a more flexible multistakeholder participation and give the most needed but ignored stakeholders the priority to participate is our next thing.
In the YIGF session, participants discussed about the fact checking system in social media. Youth expressed the concern about the rampant fake news in South-east Asia country like Philippine. All of us agree on the implementation of clear and appropriate regulation, which needs the collaboration of all stakeholders. However, to uphold the freedom of speech, we propose to suspend the account instead of removing the account as social media companies do when violating the community standard. We should also rely on AI to inspect the content while we investigate the manpower behind in the fact checking mechanism and study the controversial content. With the advent of AI checking the content and generating the news, the traditional journalism can fully engage in the mechanism with its role to give the people to right to know the truth to alleviate the threat of losing job.
Instead of question, it can be in the summary format
[ as a public good] can be rephrased as for societal welfare
Generally according to my view all questions can be given in summary format stating the outcomes of the main theme
I believe its worth mentioning the National SIGs. IGA, IGF initiatives and how these forums facilitating the multi-stakeholder participation at a local level and their contribution to the regional/global IGF.
Also a little about APASA initiative by the I* partners objectives for supporting the NRIs.
1.”Access” is one component of New Media Competence or Digital literacy. All groups need ability to access as same as they need knowledge to “analyze” messages and “Create” their own message at the same time.
2. As we know the population of senior citizens all over the world are grew up and Digital literacy and digital access have become increasingly important for all cohorts. That’s the reason why we can not ensure that senior citizens may be regarded as a homogenous group, We can not think this group does not want or is not able to make use of ICT but we need to understand their limitation and support them.
One must consider whether the right to receive and impart information should be qualified at all either with legitimate or any other. In any case, anything that is not permissible under existing laws will have its own consequences.
Digital divide, gender disparity are amongst some of the major barriers of inclusion. However, it may need intervention at many different levels as it is a problem with multiple facts. It needs in-depth research to find out the factors leading to the digital divide. There could be more than what meets the eye. The issues of the South Pacific Islands may be different than those of the rest of the regions int the world.
Also good to comtemplate- what do we perceive as the ideal ecosystem for internet, is there a model country/region to benchmark with?
Some of the pressing concerns for the Pacific in terms of 5g-
– Do we have as much internet penetration in the South Pacific Countries, Do we have enough phones/PCs, – Are our people IT/Digital literate, Can our ISP’s provide such amounts of bandwidth,
With the increased usage of ICT, there will be a growing concern for human-centric designs. additionally, ethical issues need to be explored and addressed. It may help to advocate for “digital rights”, and have it advocated to every citizen, especially since we are moving towards deploying citizen-centric
Once IT/Digital literacy becomes recognized as a “right”, then a framework can be developed for the Pacific,on how to achieve such literacy
The Internet’s Environmental Impact: an action-oriented dialogue- It would be helpful to have a tool developed to help gauge or measure the amount of ïmpact on the environment a technological device has. When the impact is measured, then thresholds can get decided, which creates a clearer picture for an end-user or technology user to fix the issues proactively
Agreed- Social Economic status is also a major barrier to inclusion especially in developing nations
It is important to note that those who are already marginalized become further disadvantaged during pandemics and it gets worse when they are not included in necessary digital spaces
It would be good to create Green ICT policies to help organizations and individuals contribute to ICT sustainability
The heavy use of digital space contributes to carbon footprints; online conferences inevitably contribute to this.
Solution: Maybe we can start thinking about offsetting the carbon footprints caused in conferences by measuring/estimating carbon footprints and compensating with greener alternatives
I think it will be better to change the word experiment for something else that captures the comment Jeremy made at the title. My suggestion for this paragraph will be something like this…
The APrIGF Synthesis Document concept was first raised and discussed at the APrIGF New Delhi 2014 Multi-Stakeholder Steering Group (MSG) meetings, and further refined over the course of MSG deliberations throughout the year. The Synthesis Document aims to identify items of common interest and relevance to Internet governance within the Asia Pacific region. The MSG decided to implement this experimental approach for the first time for the APrIGF Macao 2015, to grow and develop with input from the Asia Pacific Internet community into a more comprehensive and in-depth document in the future.
Request instead of solicit
“frequency and spectrum” is a repetition. Better to use one of the words. I think it will be better to link it to development at the end of the sentence as well. My suggestion will be:
Wi-Fi has become a vital method for achieving internet connectivity, due to its use for ad-hoc local networking, and its easy accessibility from mobile devices. Open access to the spectrum is increasingly important to support the ongoing demand to access content, services and applications that serve development needs.
Also, please check for consistency to use either internet or Internet throughout the whole document. At the moment there are a few differences
A couple of precisions. Is not the language that is internationalized but the script, better to clarify, and not to use the word spectrum here to avoid misunderstandings. My suggestion:
The linguistic diversity of Asia Pacific region underlines the necessity for faster realization of universal acceptance of the internationalization of core internet identity technologies (DNS and email) so people can connect using their own script.
So glad to see this comment about Human Rights here! Well done, fully endorse!
I don’t think there is potential for collaboration with the IG space on any issue, as it is not a established body to begin with.
Emerging technologies for virtual currency might have the potential to power the economy of the next billion. It is important to deepen the understanding of the issues around virtual currency, through dialogue and collaboration in the Asia Pacific region.
It seems a verb is missing from “Therefore strategies must infrastructure-based that are aimed at shaping technologies”?
The concept is not clear and it does not flow with the rest of the sentence.
Change for “preserve”.
Use either internet or Internet, but use it consistently.
Paragraph is a a bit clunky… Suggested edits:
Capacity building is critical to bridge the digital divide across Asia Pacific, especially in marginalised and developing countries. By empowering diverse communities to develop, deploy and use ICTs more effectively, they stay informed, understand their digital rights and responsibilities and can therefore participate, enhancing the Internet ecosystem. Capacity building strategies al local, regional and global level that address the needs of neglected communities from underserved areas are key towards digital inclusion, and should incorporate security and privacy.
This is already happening. It should not be written in future tense, as if nothing has been done.
The greatest challenge that exists for any capacity building initiative is funding allocated to strengthen participation, ensuring diversity of language and culture, as well as the background knowledge and skills of participants.
Use either cybersecurity or cyber security consistently across the document.
Clunky paragraph… edit suggested:
Cybersecurity, understood as the protection of online systems from damage and disruption, is critical not just to the stability of cyberspace, but also increasingly important to the physical world such as safety, privacy and data protection with concrete technical recommendations for consideration such as setting global encryption standards . Collaboration and capacity building are needed to mitigate and prevent cybersecurity incidents within and beyond the Asia Pacific region.
Sorry, missed a sentence:
Cybersecurity, understood as the protection of online systems from damage and disruption, is critical not just to the stability of cyberspace, but also increasingly important to the physical world on issues such as safety, privacy and data protection where concrete technical recommendations for consideration were discussed, such as setting global encryption standards . Collaboration and capacity building are needed to mitigate and prevent cybersecurity incidents within and beyond the Asia Pacific region.
First published in 2015, the Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum (APrIGF) Synthesis Document aims to identify common interests and relevance around Internet governance within the Asia Pacific region. The document also reflects about the discussions which take place at the APrIGF conference each year. Building on the APrIGF Synthesis Document from APrIGF 2015 Macao, and 2016 Taipei, the process for the 2017 Synthesis document now includes two webinars with two public comment periods to collect wider input from the Asia Pacific Internet community across all stakeholder groups to build a more comprehensive , inclusive and collaborative open document.
The Synthesis Document aims to collect the contributions and outputs of participants at the APrIGF meeting (as well as the broader APrIGF community through remote participation and dissemination on the mailing list and online platform). The document is not intended to be representative of the whole Asia Pacific region. Nevertheless, it is anticipated by APrIGF Multistakeholder Steering Group (MSG) and the Drafting Committee that the development of this Synthesis Document will help drive active participation from Asia Pacific organizations at the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) process and to raise attention about the issues identified. The MSG and the Drafting Committee also trust the process and the document it self will demonstrate the value of the annual APrIGF meeting as a platform for voices, views and thoughts in the Asia Pacific region as contribution to relevant global, national, local and international forums on Internet governance.
The Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum (APrIGF) serves as a platform for discussion, exchange and collaboration at a regional level. It also serves, where possible, to aggregate national and local IGF discussions, to ultimately advance the Internet governance understanding across the Asia Pacific region.
Please use Internet or internet consistently through out the document
More than half of the global internet users live in the Asia Pacific region, but the true benefits of bridging the access gap can only be realized if it leads to socio-economic empowerment of the multifaceted human capital in the region. Therefore strategies must be in place for the infrastructure to be able to respond to the increasing demand; to support the research and deployment of technologies and solutions; to adopt policies to bridge the digital divide; to improve network resilience to be better prepared for disasters; to create a holistic approach towards eGovernance and to push back against Internet shutdowns.
Concrete examples presented at the event include benefits such as: 1) Community networks and public access to ICT improve digital literacy and facilitate effective utilization of access by marginalized and underserved communities; 2) Youth-driven initiatives leverage information technology to drive social changes and empower the emerging generation of the region; 3) Technological solutions such as IPv6, Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and Email Address Internationalization (EAI), facilitate access for the next billion Internet users while 4) inclusive policy measures, such as Universal Acceptance of Internationalised Domain Names, pave the way to support, conserve and enhance their individual and collective uniqueness, the language, geographic and cultural diversity that these new users will bring to the Internet.
Across the Asia Pacific region, legislation has been developed to cover various aspects of the Internet. Legislation that traditionally governed offline spaces is now also used in tandem with these specialised legislation for virtual spaces and online behaviours. These provisions must respect internationally recognised conventions for human rights and standards (for example, and not limited to, the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime). Particularly, governments should be urged to reconsider the manner in which Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) are currently implemented. The right to privacy, access to justice and rule of law must be upheld when data of individuals are shared by states.
stakeholders (not countries)
Advances in data encryption required due consideration for an expiration date of protection measures and mechanisms, so contemplated regulations stand the test of time. Similarly, the mobile and IoT industries also face challenges of time and expiration. Regulatory measures should balance consumer protection with the responsibility that hardware manufacturers and software developers will take in making their devices secure for a reasonable time period.
Privacy and data protection are current issues of concern, specially as they may come into conflict with freedom of expression, and can result in data-driven discrimination.
Move after the next paragraph. It makes more sense for flow of the document
Move after paragraph 21 to improve document flow.
While expectation of privacy may vary between cultures, comprehensive protection mechanisms must meet internationally recognised right to privacy and be linked to the concepts of consent and agency. International minimum standards should be created, guaranteeing the highest level of protection as a default safeguard, considering the nature of cross-border data transfer for online services, differing levels of protection in relevant jurisdictions and general lack of user awareness. These protections should also take into account the rapid development of technology that may make current data encryption, data-masking and obfuscation techniques obsolete in the future.
Digital trade and e-commerce are key enablers for the development of a global digital economy, yet they inevitably challenge physical national borders. Disruptive innovations such as blockchain have the potential to change behaviours, practices and interactions in business, political and social environments. The digital economy cannot be successful without trust, free flow of information and appropriate business rules for different jurisdictions.
To realise the potential growth of the digital economy, free trade agreements should be reviewed in light of the growing trend of limiting free flow of information and/or requiring data localization, as well as source code disclosure unless there is a legitimate public policy reason.
Coordinated multistakeholder collaboration and thorough discussion among all other stakeholders with active government participation is indispensable to realizing the benefits of the digital economy to all.
Agree with rewording proposed by Peng Wha above.
Keep title spelling Human Rights in full.
Maybe better to move this paragraph above as part of the previous one (after the mentions to WSIS and Tunis).
Change title to “Internet shutdowns and blocking”
Above there was a comment about add necessity. If that word is added above it should be consistent on this paragraph
Move paragraphs 29 and 30 right after paragraph 26. Do not leave gender to be the last issue on the document
I will add here “as well as the persistent disparities in literacy and income, barriers in the form of social and cultural norms that negatively affect women’s employability, as well as online gender-based violence.”
Some repetition between paragraph 29 and 30, worth reviewing.
Sincere appreciation to the APrIGF secretariat -DotAsia-, the MSG, PC and the local hosts that made the event possible. The 3 themes selected for this year, continue to acquire additional meaning as the challenges to have meaningful access to the Internet are still front and center to the work many of us do.
It proved to be a good decision to do that change, as the program shaped in a way that showed wider dimensions of the themes.
As about half of the world’s population is now connected to the Internet, the other half is still offline. People in the unconnected communities generally reside in remote, rural and other hard to reach areas. Due to the low rate of return, the private sector does not find it profitable to connect such communities. At the same time, governments do not always have the funds to build the necessary infrastructure. There is, however, a help-yourself model, where communities themselves can take steps to get connected – Community Networks (CNs). Community Networks are of the people, by the people, for the people.
Community Networks and other community-based connectivity initiatives could be a viable alternative to traditional large scale commercial networks in providing access to unconnected communities. Slowing growth in voice and internet connectivity has prompted renewed interest in alternative approaches to addressing the needs of the billions of people in developing countries who still suffer from ineffective communications services due to affordability and coverage limitations. Community Networks, aside from helping to meet worldwide aspirations for universal access, as encapsulated in the Sustainable Development Goals, also provide other advantages including more local control over how the network is used, greater potential for attention to the needs of women and other marginalized groups, retention of more funds within the community and increased potential to foster a sense of agency and empowerment within the community. These networks provide the trainings for the local residents on safe use of the internet. Raising capacity is one of the key aspects of such initiatives.
Communities tackle the infrastructures that are embedded in and affect deploying and adopting telecoms. These infrastructures include all sorts of social, technical, political, legal, administrative, methodological and institutional structures and processes. We must continue identifying policy and regulatory changes needed at the national level, as well as financial and technical support that CNs in the region require so they are on the same playing field as telecoms and further highlight issues such as the need for increased access to spectrum/telecom data which will contribute to breaking down structural inequalities when it comes to access. CNs relate very well to the over-all theme of “Enabling a safe, secure and universal internet for all”. Community Network are run by the communities and for the communities, making internet affordable and accessible for otherwise unconnected people.
* [WS55. Community Networks – Connecting the Hardest Half]
The above comment is in relation to this section
/* Style Definitions */
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
I suggest that under priorities we add this:
A Civilised, Safe And Healthy Internet: That access is accompanied by awareness, education and actions by all parties from governments to service providers, content providers, NGOs and individual users, including parents, to develop and maintain an internet that is civilised, safe and healthy, in particular engendering the development of such an Internet by media literacy from an early age.
Sorry, my comment earlier was wonky.
I suggest that under priorities we add this:
A Civilised, Safe And Healthy Internet: That access is accompanied by awareness, education and actions by all parties from governments to service providers, content providers, NGOs and individual users, including parents, to develop and maintain an internet that is civilised, safe and healthy, in particular engendering the development of such an Internet by media literacy from an early age.
How about adding connectivity to rural users also to this section
Well I think this is a good synthesis document. I believe Internet cost is affordable to all, in a situation of inclusivity. The Internet continue to a major tool for employment, education, socio-economic development, political, health development, etc and should be widely developed to meet the needs of mankind. Discussions on IGF should continue to improved upon to benefit the community and the society at large. We must also continue to develop good strategies to eliminate or drastically reduce the activities of cyber-criminals in our societies since it is a social cancer or menace.
Good point, either of mine
Enabling meaningful access to the Internet not only involves building infrastructure or connectivity, but it also means, to enable access to an Internet which is free, open, affordable, accessible, neutral, inclusive, diverse and uninterrupted among others. ( So that, we cover all aspects of Internet Access)
The document currently points out we need a disaster management plan. Why do we need was pointed out by Vint Cerf, he mentioned how concerns with respect to cable landings are increasing with increase in global warming and in order to mitigate the same we need comprehensive disaster management plan. (we can consider including the ‘why’ part to make document comprehensive)
Instead of using ‘can result in data driven discrimination’, I was wondering if we could use ‘may result in data driven discrimination’. Just sounds more grammatically sound.
Also, we can add something on the lines of what happens offline manifests online and how women are being affected by online abuse.
“AI learns (machine learning from human behavior), but Human also learn themselves”.
This means that if we use a moderating mechanism from AI (automated approach) to tackle online harm, it should regard as a tool to help moderate hate speech against others and should collaborate a human-centric approach because humans are also learners.
They learn the community guidelines, they learn from mistakes. They can identify hate speech, the community can counter hate speech and machine-based moderation biases.
So making use of these two approaches together is important to create better online communication exchange and fair and harmonious engagement of online media users.
There are specific conditions, scopes, and levels in which AI-based automation could and necessary to be implemented, and there are levels that human moderators play a role to moderate the conversations.
For example, to address challenges to distinguish between hate speech, offensive language (which is different things), and freedom of opinion/expression. Let us let People learn digital ethics together and creating their own norms and rules but in mitigation for possible future action that could harm vulnerable targets on the Internet, we should try (also) AI.
a. Providing information intended for the general public to persons with disabilities in accessible formats and technologies appropriate to different kinds of disabilities in a timely manner and without additional cost;
b. Accepting and facilitating the use of sign languages, augmentative and alternative communication, and all other accessible means, modes and for&mats of communication of their choice by persons with disabilities in official interactions;
c. Urging private entities that provide services to the general public, including through the Internet, to provide information and services in accessible and usable formats for persons with disabilities;
d. Encouraging the mass media, including providers of information through the Internet, to make their services accessible to persons with disabilities;
e. Promote the design, development, production and distribution of accessible information and communications technologies and systems at an early stage, so that these technologies and systems become accessible at minimum cost.
f. Promote other appropriate forms of assistance and support to persons with disabilities to ensure their access to information;
g. Promote access for persons with disabilities to new information and communications technologies and systems, including the Internet;
h. purchase of ICT software and hardware by government for public office, education institution and work place need to be usable with the help of assistive technology for example, all software to be usable with the help of screen reading software.
i. . concept on Accessible ICT development must include promotion of “universal design” and “assistive technologies”. Government must address the crucial importance of “ICT accessibility standards/guidelines development”.
Please include an word inclusive
Please include inclusive Internet Governance in the last line.
I support what Lokesh has purposed thus I would like to volunteer also
Mesh networks should be also be included when dealing with infrastructure, digital literacy and empowerment’ and accessibility
Freedom of expression in the public sphere, such as public Tweets; remain public as opposed to protected Tweets; these has not correlation with breach of privacy.
+1 A similar approach is being take by the current Fiji Government but is limited to schools in rural areas
Freedom of expression and privacy needs greater clarification since in the real world public sphere, such as public Tweets; remain public as opposed to protected Tweets; thus has no correlation with breach of privacy.
There is a need to protect the IG multi-stakeholder model from political and corporate lobbying
An example from Fiji, Software Foundation; a non-profit organisation had instituted an eLearning project at a rural school this was achieved by creating the needed digital infrastructure.
The might be a need for a sub-heading for blocking of anti-government websites in the region. But, to this; Fiji has provided an interesting example, when in 2006; there was a coup and subsequently a military lead government; there was no blocking of anti-government websites by the regime.