Embracing the digital (r)evolution – 2016
9 June 2016 | 9:30-11:00
Programme overview 2016
Video record
See the video record in our youtube channel
Transcript
Provided by: Caption First, Inc., P.O. Box 3066, Monument, CO 80132, Phone: +001-719-481-9835, www.captionfirst.com
This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you very much. I’d like to repeat your thanks to the EuroDIG team and secretariat and also to the team at EURid who have done tremendous work in organizing this event and putting on this huge show. This is a European dialogue on Internet governance and that implies not the talking heads and in the chairs but all of you. The Internet governance forum is defined by all the people in the audience as experts, not just the people on the stage. The official title is Embracing the digital revolution or evolution, because there’s an R in brackets, and it’s to hear your expectations so let’s think about expectations not just for this event but also for Internet governance dialogue.
One of the things that Sandra highlighted was the youth delegation but I think one of the challenges for the Internet governance dialogue is also to be inclusive and to welcome more people into the fold each time. So could I just could you put up your hand if this is your first EuroDIG? Oh. Oh. So, okay. This was actually, this is partly a trap because those people who can you keep your hands raised, please? I’d like I would like hang on.
(Laughter)
Come on. There were more of you. Thank you. So I’ve got a very valuable prize here for somebody who wants to
(laughter)
take up add I’d like a newcomer to EuroDIG to come and join me here and give me your thoughts, expectations, either for what this event is going to bring to you or else what you would like from Internet governance. Could I have somebody to volunteer with this wonderful prize? Do you want to come forward? Okay. You’re asking for it because I’m going to come and pick on somebody. Oh, please, come up. Should we all give him a huge round of applause.
(Applause
So I got this is like buses, this is what British people say buses. You wait for 1 and 2 come along at once. No, you’re not getting away that so are we going to toss up for it? Introduce yourself.
>> Hello. I’m running a citizen D institute which deals with Internet governance, net neutrality, and battle for cyber security and privacy. This is my first EuroDIG. So thank you for having me. What I’m hoping to learn I guess it’s obviously one is exchange ideas and hear from other representatives within the region and outside the region what is going on there. And maybe form up, I don’t know, to get some ideas about how to tackle challenges like I said before, net neutrality and other. Thank you.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. I think you need a round of applause.
(Applause)
And I’m going to get you a prize. Hold on a sec. This is very smooth here. I wasn’t lying. Thank you, very much.
(Applause)
And thank you for joining us. And this is another newcomer to EuroDIG. Please tell us about your expectations and hopes and introduce yourself.
>> I’m Maria. I promised Emily yesterday at the bar that I would do this.
(Laughter)
>> EMILY TAYLOR: This is completely spontaneous.
>> So I’ve been involved in other Internet things for a while and my big interest at the moment is the Internet of Things. And it is so clear to me that we are not going to get where we need to get if we don’t embrace the multistakeholder and have everybody that is affected by a decision a part of the decision. But it’s my first time so let’s see.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Great, thank you very much. So from our first two speakers we heard about the almost the classic is it right to call it a sort of standoff or some sort of clash between security and privacy. And also Internet of Things is an important emerging issue. Is there anybody else who would like to come to the stage and highlight a key theme that you think we should be focusing on in this dialogue? So there are different ways you can come up. There are mics in the audience but I would like to try and break down this sort of separation between audience and up on the stage. In fact, you know, if necessary would you like to come up? Please, do, thank you. Please introduce yourself. Thank you for coming up.
>> Sorry, I don’t know where to stop. I’m pretty nervous because this is my first EuroDIG. I come here as an individual. I’m Debra, I came here with my organization but I’m here also as an activist of the campaign of the Council of Europe. And we like to speak about we come here so I would like Men to start.
>> Good morning. I’m Men; I work also with the no hate speech movement campaign. It’s a youth campaign. I think what brings us here is to wish to see EuroDIG as a dialogue platform. How do we secure human rights online and for young people to enjoy the full benefits of Internet because it has lots of opportunities to share but we also know that hate speech pushes out certain groups and they’re not fully benefitting of the opportunities.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: And are you looking at the impact on individuals of hate speech or are you looking at ways of curbing hate speech? Which is your focus?
>> Actually we are really proud to be an inclusive group ourselves. Youth campaign made by youth people for youth people. And we are here to initiate this dialogue because I heard a lot talking about inclusivity, so let’s create this favored platform for everybody. So we are here to have this dialogue with everybody so come to us, let’s initiate that dialogue. Because to make Internet a more accessible and inclusive environment we should start giving these tools, giving education and training. And this is one of the main aims of our campaign. We are talking to individuals, to groups, to everybody because we want to be inclusive so it’s kind of a general
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you.
>> Our main work is Human Rights education also on the online space but we notice young people are reporting and they don’t see follow up. So I think it’s interesting moment to discuss how do we report, what is the consequence then and how can that be transparent so the young people know it makes sense of this process of reporting and governing our space.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: How do you take effective action without curbing legitimate freedom of expression at the same time? Exactly. But preventing harm. Thank you, very much. And let’s give these people a round of applause.
(Applause)
Would anybody else like to come up and join the dialogue? I think that’s Goran Marby, the new CEO of ICANN. Would you like to come to the stage?
>> I’m always on stage.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Well I’ll come and join you then. Welcome to EuroDIG.
>> Thank you. I really first I would like to say hello. My name is Goran Marby. I’m the new CEO and president of ICANN since two weeks so please don’t ask too hard questions yet. And I take full responsibility of any bureaucrat to get any of the
Why am I here and what do I expect? ICANN is about a multistakeholder model which can be seen as a long and tedious from sess. Many times you start where does the process actually start? And it’s actually started at events like this. Even if the discussion is here, it doesn’t give any immediate effect. It will form the discussions coming for the next layer and it will come into the policy work. So I don’t have any expectations out of this more than the fact that I’m very happy to be here and proud to be a part of this. The outcome of it will be something that you form. It’s nothing that I get involved in at all. But the discussion you are forming now will shape the discussions we are going to have about Internet governance over the next couple of years and the ICANN environment. So thank you very much for having me here and good morning.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much.
(Applause)
So is somebody standing up at the back because they’re finding a seat or because they would like to say something? Thank you, please.
>> Hello, good morning, everyone. Good morning moderator. I’m from the international telecommunications forum. Many know me from the WSIS forum. Today I’m here in my other capacity as the directing person of the European coordination for the ITU which has several regional initiatives as the priorities for the implementations for the four years. Many of those initiatives are touching upon the subjects which will be discussed here so therefore in order to ensure that we are doing the things in the way that we are taking into account all debates at the European level it’s important to us also to take a look at these what is discussed in the multistakeholder and bottom up approach and to see how we can transform this into the implementation in the real sense, the quality of services, while implementing the infrastructure but also in other areas like accessibility, cyber security in particular, or innovation. So I’m looking forward to listening to many debates here and looking forward also to discussing with the potential partners supporting the implementation at the regional level for our great countries. Thank you, very much.
(Applause)
>> EMILY TAYLOR: I’ve got a lady there so please, the floor is yours and then I’m going to come to you.
>> My expectation it goes with real access to languages, the small languages, the small Albanians, the small Romanian to have really borderless Internet and to have a clear Internet where to be a majority doesn’t mean that you are a minority and when tradition is not used as culture and when intermediary don’t take only the data but they take the responsibility especially when they want the Internet to be the Internet. Thank you.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much.
(Applause)
I’ve got a gentleman down here and there’s a whole cluster of people down here. Why don’t you go first since you have the microphone and I’m going to come to the side of the audience. Please.
>> Good morning, all. I am the thematic coordinator for information policy for the Council of Europe. Actually, this is also my first EuroDIG and I came here and security asked me what’s in your bag? And I said, well, only to declare actually 800 page study of filtering, blocking and take down of illegal Internet content. I only have two minutes so I will just make a resume in three lines. First of all, the Europe we are talking about is not only about 28 countries, in Strasbourg at the Council of Europe it’s 47. That’s one thing. And second, this study on which there is an important side event is a game changer. Why? You might be interested what is the state of affairs on the freedom of expression in your country? Second, business, if you’re looking into doing business in the 47 member states, you perhaps would like to know how the legal situation is. Third, you NGO’s and people who are concerned with the future of the Internet, you would like to draw perhaps conclusions what should be the next step, what should be indicators of Internet freedom? So this was the present in my bag from Strasbourg. Thank you, very much.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you very much, the 800 page study, that’s quite a weight to carry around with you.
>> Good morning, everyone. My name is Ana. The reason I’m here at the moment is because I’m also at the media summer school which is a side event for young people to educate young people. We look forward to bringing conclusions to you on how to involve more young people on this process because we call about digital revolution, and multistakeholder but the stakeholders must be equal players. We are not as included and involved as it is. So we will have different sessions over here and some of them will even talk about the feel of empowerment through education and making young people become active players in the field. And of course we have our ideas in the topic but this is not enough because we will need your help and we will need your ideas on how to bring young people into the discussion. This is not my first EuroDIG, this is my second one. Last year was an amazing experience, now EuroDIG has come to my city. And also I’m involved in the planning meeting and I remember this long and never ending decision of how we came up with the name of Embracing the Digital Revolution. If we embrace something it means we take ownership and we as Internet users need to take equal ownership so I’m really looking forward to these discussions and see how my other fellows will be raising all our voices in this sense. So thank you very much and enjoy these days in Brussels.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Can I ask you one question? This is your second EuroDIG. Have you been to the international IGF yet?
>> Not yet.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: People such as yourself who might never go I’m sure you will go to an IGF one day, but there is a value in the regional dialogue and that is bringing people in who might not travel to the international meeting. And I think those that do travel to the international meeting it’s something to bear in mind. I’m going to distribute microphones.
>> Thank you. John Carr from the European NGO for child safety online. I want to make a point within the important development within the European Union. I appreciate it’s not the home of Europe but it’s a major chunk of it. And since the last EuroDIG only six months ago the European Union people agreed in general data protection regulation. Prior to this becoming law in every one of the 28 member states which by the way I believe and certainly hope will continue to be mine, if you haven’t guessed it from my accent, I’m a Brit. So it will become law in about June of 2018. Prior to the GDPR being agreed with the exception of Spain there was in affect a single age at which a young person wasn’t considered to be old enough. It was 13. It was a single age applied across the whole of Europe and globally. The GDPR changed that, the default age at which a young person can decide for themselves without parental consent on whether or not to join a particular platform or download an app. It was changed to 16 but it also gave member states the right to choose from the age of 16 down to the age of 13. So we now have four potentials ages. In fact we have more than four, so there you are. This is going to complicate a whole set of issues quite considerably both in the context of privacy, the way which apps, the Internet of Things. For this particular EuroDIG I hope in the discussions that we have over the next couple of days we will all bear this in mind and I certainly think that this time next year the next EuroDIG we will be able to have a more substantive debate on it and that’s an important thing to happen because it certainly did not happen in the processing leading up to the European Union deciding on this new law.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. There’s a growing cue over there so I’m also aware of people waiting here so if we keep our remarks
>> Very breach. First I’d like to introduce yourself in case you don’t know me. Almost I know many of you. I used to be policy officer responsible for EuroDIG in the DG CONNECT. Now it’s a great pleasure to see EuroDIG in Brussels, it’s amazing to see all of you five minutes’ walk from my apartment. I’m very happy that right now EuroDIG is in very good hands of the Internet governance team although on a daily basis they call me a traitor. What I would like to tell you is basically right now I’m working on fundamental rights. Last year my unit organized an annual on fundamental rights which lead to very concrete policy initiatives. And that’s why I would like to very warmly invite you to participate in this year’s public consultation which leads to the annual colloquium on Internet policy. Internet policy stakeholders it would be extremely crucial for us. It’s open until 14th of July. There are 40 questions but if you want the reply to only one, just with facts, good one, we are more than happy to have an input from you. Many thanks.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. Lynn, I’m coming to you, now. Thank you, very much. And then I’m going to come over to you guys so get ready. And then I’m going to come to this side of the room. Thank you.
>> Thank you. I’m Lynn. I was recently appointed in March of this year as the chair of the Internet governance forum Multistakeholder Advisory Group. The IGF secretary is also represented here. I’m sure you all know him. We would like to thank the EuroDIG organizers, hosts and sponsors. We would like to thank the participants who are of course essential. I want to talk a little bit and I know it wasn’t quite the purpose of this section
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Doesn’t matter.
>> Very flexible. There were quite a few new people in the audience so maybe a quick focus on the IGF and then about two of the key activities over the coming months. The IGF is a unique forum just as EuroDIG here is a unique forum. It was convened and is convened under the UN Secretary General. This is the first time the position of chair has been held by someone who is non governmental and by a female so I’m not sure if you call that evolution or revolution but
(applause)
I think it also goes to show how much the multistakeholder model was really being accepted around the world as well. So as I said the IGF is convened by the UN Secretary General. The processes are still evolving as any of our multistakeholder processes are because this is a journey. So what I wanted to talk a little bit about was the upcoming IGF forum and the retreat. We are trying to reenergize and revitalize the IGF. The MAG and certainly all the participants of the broader IGF are trying to help us how we revitalize. This year in the programme the overall theme which is enabling inclusive and sustainable growth was established by the MAG and clearly reflects the importance of the SDGs for the world as well. The workshops were coming from the proposals and that closed this last Monday and there are roughly 260 proposals in which is either record high or near record high. The MAG cycle this year is much compressed. We started in March as opposed to November or December of last year so I think that’s excellent. For those that haven’t been able to participate in MAG meetings we have fairly robust online mechanisms, we are trying to improve those. But you can still participate deeply and make a real impact and have your voice heard even if you can’t be physically present. Maybe the last comment is to remind everyone the IGF this year is December 9th. It’s in Guadalajara. There’s a need to improve and enhance the IGF. The input that we get from all of you plus the IGF outputs itself thought it would be helpful to get a small group of people together. Just maybe two more comments and I know I’m going a bit long
>> EMILY TAYLOR: It’s all right. I’m going to give you special dispensation for that.
>> Thank you. I will be brief.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Brief.
>> The retreat is going to be scheduled at the back end of the MAG meeting in July. There’s an open consultation which will focus on the retreat as well. We have tried to make it as open as possible so I hope you’ll all see the advancement in some of these processes. The agenda is posted online for public comment. The comments will go publicly not just the secretariat. We are looking for input again online. And any of the outputs of the retreat will go through the appropriate set of consultations, community consultations. And those outputs will be public as well. There’s a series of frequently asked questions which are posted on the website which I hope will answer a lot of the other questions as well. The participants in the retreat have no standing beyond the retreat. It will go back to all the appropriate communities and processes such as this one. I think that’s really important. Maybe the final point there is that DESA did go to extremes to open up the participation as the bulk of the participants are actually going to be directly appointed by those communities which is those that are familiar with the MAG selection process, you know, it’s slightly different. So I think everybody is embracing the multistakeholder model and we are all looking to improve. It is a continual journey has been referenced earlier so we would like to encourage people to participate, please, in all of the online requests in support of the retreat and obviously the IGF itself as well. So thank you. And thank you for allowing me the extra time.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: You talked about revitalizing the process. That always raises alarm bells to some extent. Does that mean it needed revitalizing?
>> I don’t think there was an energy loss. I think last year people were waiting in anticipation of the WSIS plus ten. There were strong signals early on that it would be renewed but it’s not over until it over. Ten years was a big vote of confidence. Having said that I would also say in the last few years that participation from governments and senior policy makers has declined from the earliest days and it is a multistakeholder forum. We don’t need those other three communities to talk amongst ourselves. We need government officials to come participate and stay.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. So I’m going to take the person patiently waiting in the front of the queue there and I have this microphone here. And can I just thank you, very much, you go ahead. Is anybody else thinking about asking questions, can you just raise your hand? I want to get a sense. Particularly those back of the class. Are you lurking there because you don’t want to say anything or are you actually secretly wanting to join in? Anybody? Raise your hands.
Okay. Good. Well, we have got plenty of time so we will get to you. Please, go ahead, Marco.
>> MARCO: I’ll be brief. We are the ones telling you to deploy IPG6 but that’s not why we are here. Question for the people who are still in the room, who of you is responsible for running a piece of the Internet, whether that’s a website or a network or a very large search engine? 1, 2, 3, 4, come on. Okay. Okay. Really? Only? No?
>> Some behind you.
>> Okay. So I think that’s important. Realize that the Internet is not owned by somebody, it’s a very decentralized system so whatever you take back out of this discussion please also apply it to yourself, even if you’re a small little website part of that puzzle is you, even minor but you can also make a difference, whether it’s accessibility, whether it’s content, hate speech, we all have a little responsibility in the room. So please also when discussing this realize that you can to make a difference.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Marco, before you go away, come back. Do you think that you know, you made that point about the technology being shared. This is a distributed system. Do you think it still is distributed and decentralized as it was say ten years ago?
>> I think it’s even more. We in our particular location we see more and more members joining our organization and starting their own network and building their little piece of infrastructure and back part of the Internet. And with the IoT it will only get bigger. There’s so many startups, little businesses, that become part of the Internet, part of the Eco system and I think we all have a part to keeping that ecosystem alive and better.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: How many think the Internet is less centralized now than it was ten years ago? One, two, a few? How many people think it’s more centralized? Interesting. Maybe not technically, maybe we are thinking about different things there. Thank you, very much, Marco and apologizing for high jacking with you the question if that’s the right word.
>> Thank you, very much, Emily, by the way, great job. I’m the chairman of the multilingual Internet group and it is my first EuroDIG.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Welcome.
>> Thank you. You don’t need to applaud.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: I’m afraid I gave away my prize.
>> You can applaud if I come back again. I want to invoke a couple of statements that have been made earlier on which I think were very valuable, especially when talking about the multistakeholder model and Internet governance and the bottom up. Megan and the ICANN CEO came and spoke about process. Process is critical. When I tell you and please pay attention to this when I tell you that you are in clear and present danger, do you have time for a conversation?
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Me?
>> No, that’s a the question is would you have time for a conversation or a debate when you are under clear and present danger? The answer is no. So the bot line approach, bot up and your multistakeholder process is critical for process, however, giving tribute to Paris and Brussels and what they have endured recently we are under clear and present danger. And cyber security as everybody talks about as important as it is in the state of affairs we are in today. It’s not the key word, it’s survivability. Decision makers have an obligation to make a difference to their society. You’ve got to make sure your organizations and your nations are up to scratch in dealing with the new threats coming from the extremist organization groups because they’re not doing the tradition stuff that we saw in Paris or London, they’re doing it online and most of what they have been doing you’re not aware yet. So with that in mind, I truly want you to make by the way, in the audience, raise your hand if you are a decision maker at your organization. Chairman, CEO or board member. I would say probably what? Ten percent?
>> EMILY TAYLOR: I think people can put their hands down. I saw quite a few hands.
>> Ten percent. Thank you. Reason why this is important, whatever business or entity you represent, you are in the front line to make your organization or government or country better secured and prepared for the new threats and you’ve got the keep in mind it is about survivability today, no longer about cyber security. If you want more information ask me later.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Before going over to you, thank you for waiting, I’m going to pick on this lady here who put up her hand. You said you were planning on saying something. We have heard from a lot of men. I want to encourage the women in the audience to stand up.
>> Hi, I’m Ruth. I’m kind of here for lots of different reasons really but I’ve actually been involved in coming to the EuroDIG in the last few years but last year I attended remotely and I also attended the IGF remotely with a group of us former youth participants and we took part in the IGF remotely. I guess what I want to say is there are empty seats here in this room but there are people who are participating online. And how can we think about how we want to take it back and maybe think about other people that would like to contribute to these discussions and how you can maybe share with them how they can remote participate. And also make sure that their comments are taken into the EuroDIG, otherwise I think it would be a really missed opportunity. I guess that’s my question. Are there any remote participants that want to contribute?
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Do we have a remote moderator in the room? Is there much going on online? I think most people do participate in that way. Do you want to have a few moments while we go to the very patient gentleman who has been standing behind the mic? Sir, thank you for your patience, I’m going to come to you now, yes, please.
>> Okay. Thank you. Can everybody hear like this? I’ll try and be brief because my wife always says that I speak too much.
(Laughter)
Now, just want to go back a little bit. Before I do that I would like to thank Marc van Wesemael for bringing up in his opening speech very, very interesting points. I’ll get back to that in a minute. I want to go back to the early 1990s. If we think about how far the Internet has come it’s fantastic. We have an Internet of Things and how can we make this effective, how can we keep it secure, make sure that, you know, we are actually making good on some of the promises that this technology had in the 1990s. My wife happened to be one of the first web page designers since she was responsible very early in the 1990s for the first web page of the global environment facility in Washington. So it’s been a very interesting ride. However to make good on some of the promises, if we have an Internet of Things and the technology works and we keep it secure as it was intended to be before it became the Internet and before that, then the key word of survivability still rings a bell for those of us who are old enough. And yes indeed it’s something we need to look at. Survivability from a technical side but also survivability from a human side and the human side is where some of the promises have been fulfilled and I think it’s going to take a lot of work and hopefully that’s the expectation we can also build partnerships here because most of the companies involved in Internet and in Internet technology have thrived in democracies. In other words, you have the Human Rights to assemble, to speak, to do, to undertake, to make money, and in that sense I would like to ask Marc van Wesemael, does he know actually what monetary value is of a single bit on the Internet? Can we calculate it? But in terms of democracy, that is how do you put those Human Rights to work for everybody? And that for me is the interesting bid because we were at a discussion in Budapest last year, I couldn’t attend this year, you know, and when you think about it, the Internet we can share a lot of information, we can store a lot of information, we can access it, but how do you make sure that it doesn’t threaten us, that’s one part of the story. The other part is how can we all together build an Internet of citizens that does what the Internet promised to do, that is develop by society, evolved with the help of society, and how can we make sure that it continues to serve society? That’s where Marc’s remark came in. Multilingualism as well as the reference that Marc made, how can we make sure that everybody is involved? I don’t want to deviate on what are the threats. How can we all use specific tools that are already out there, the Internet governance strategy, how can we use E democracy that set out principals that allow us with these multistakeholder to observe the pluralism. I think it’s important we see how we can make this happen in the interest of all of this.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you very much; you’ve raised a number of issues relating to human rights, to multilingualism. I would like to call on you, Frank La Rue to give us guidance on how we preserve what is good about the Internet and our Human Rights and values.
>> Thank you, very much. First of all thank you for reminding me, I was the special rapporteur. I would like to say a couple things. Number one we believe strongly in the regional forums like this because we believe in the IGF, in the global forum but we believe it has to be built from the agenda of the region or even the country forums because of the reality that comes up through the grapevine of Civil Societies that we find out what is going on in the world. I would like to make a couple of priorities for us as UNESCO. Probably the new framework of the major prior to is how to build all Internet communication and all forms of communication into the 2030 agenda. The general assembly approved the new strategic development for the world. We believe it’s comprehensible, it is clear and it is not a recipe for the developing nations, it was a common agenda assumed by everyone. So this needs a constant systematic flow of information to the policy makers and the ground communities. The local communities never heard they existed. Let’s not make this mistake again. This was a wonderful agenda. Let’s have all of our ICTs work on allowing some degree of flow, whether it be on economic issues, water preservation, whether it be giving women equal opportunities or whether it be climate change or global warming. All those issues need specific elements of information and a permanent flow of information. That is defined in goal 16, especially 16 10 which said a part of the basis for development is to guarantee the public access to information. Didn’t say access to information, it said access to public information. This is a call today because we are talking about Internet, media, journalism, in the new digital world. So that was message one. Two, we had to connect the dots conference in Paris and UNESCO. We want to see Internet as a rights based approach. Here I must defer, we don’t see Internet as the battle field today. I think this is a problem of conception because there is clearly a misuse of Internet from cyber bullying to sexual harassment of women to terrorist groups. But this does not make the Internet a battle field. I think they complement each other. There’s a rhetoric in the world today trying to confront these issues which is very, very dangerous. We have to guarantee national security with the guarantee of rights of all the Human Rights and especially freedom of expression and privacy. Privacy cannot be breached in the name of security. We are defending the individuals
(applause)
we are defending the individuals but we are also defending the democrat system and this is part of the security element. We want the openness and neutrality of the Internet. We want the accessibility and universality of the Internet. Here we have a specific proposal, everyone agrees on a multistakeholder dialogue but we want the study of the policies which are made based on a multistakeholder dialogue because everyone talks about multistakeholder dialogue and we can have a meeting and talk about it but ultimately are the decisions being made there with all sectors participating or not? And this is a study we plan to begin immediately; we are looking for partners so anyone who is interested in partnering with UNESCO would be gladly received. We can make a reality that Internet is at the service of all.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Hold on to the microphone for a second. You mentioned a study on multistakeholder governance because it occurs to me I think I’ve heard a lot of people saying this that you’re now getting people who obviously don’t agree with each other on a vast range of issues, all advocating multistakeholder governance, do you think their talking about the same thing?
>> I think we are talking about getting people together but we are not talking about the level of decision making that goes there. Gathering people, convening individuals and sector is not always easy but to that level we have agreed. One of the debates of the IGF was should there be a conclusions and recommendations of the IGF or not? Something as simple as that which is still a debate. How far should it go? There’s a value in sitting down and having a debate and sharing it but I think now we want to go a step further and we want the multistakeholder dialogue in every single state to make a difference in policy making. At least in the level of recommendation.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you. I think I owe it to that cluster of people who gave you a round of applause when you mentioned surveillance and privacy. Frank wrote a report before we knew the words Edward Snowden and you pointed out the surveillance capital, the technologies. You mentioned the importance of openness and everyone, you know, all of this information being available to all but do we actually mean that? Do we really mean that all of the information about us should be available to governments in the name of security?
>> And my position is that no, there is an element of privacy. Privacy actually has limitations like most rights, not all rights but including freedom of expression when it comes to article 20 and hate teach and the protection of children and the protection of women against sexual harassment. I believe privacy can also have limitations. What is not allowed and what is happening is security agencies by themselves and with no oversight are making the decision what type of information they can get and say. They are getting the corporation of some for this as well. This is a breach of privacy. And I think this openly weakens our democratic system and this makes us less safe than if we uphold democracy and the rule of law.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much.
(Applause)
I’d like to go to you, please, Frederic.
>> Thank you. My name is Frederic Donck and this is not my first EuroDIG. I love the logo, this is so Brussels. I’m working with the Internet Society. We are a strong supporter. So we all are committed to the success of it. Why are we? Each time we discuss the issues in the environment we add another layer of good practices of understanding of how it works it reality and I trust this will be the case this time as well. EuroDIG is also more than just this event. For three years, four years, I see a lot of different national IGF in Europe all over the place and I believe EuroDIG is key and instrumental here. So let me make a comment in line with what Frank La Rue said. We are what people might call a part with this world. This is critical. I believe we have a global agreement in understanding that Internet governance is the key component in every discussion but how could we influence the process of decision making? We need to develop and demonstrate that this model works with concrete outcome and solutions and I trust that this might be another step towards this. Thank you, very much.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much, Frederic. Lorena, is there anything happening on the Twitter feed or remote groups we need to hear about?
>> There’s a lot happening on the Twitter feeds. We are going to have all the screens everywhere, not only here but also in the workshops. We also have remote participants but they’re chilling and enjoying the whole debate. So what I can perhaps summarize from the Twitter feed is we have two main conversations here. On the one side it’s a conversation about the process, about the importance of getting everyone into this conversation. So not only the privileged ones that are usually well known but also youth, women, different ages, different regions, and also people that are not used to these sort of technicalities and semantic use of words that are not normal for the common people. So there were some demands about breaching this by using normal words but realizing that many of the problems that we have in net politics are not technical problems but political problems, social problems. There is a lot of encouraging to acknowledge also participants that are not only outside the net but also with disabilities trying to use new technologies to also be part of the discussions so we actually have you can see and on the thread it’s a bit delayed to give all of you more time to grasp the different discussions that we have. But you can follow up this part of the discussion. And the second part of the discussion is also about privacy. So there were many applauses and many reTweets for Frank La Rue on privacy issues.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you for that summary of a constantly moving field. One of the things that occurs to me listening to people’s remarks as they’re coming forward today is how different this dialogue feels to the Internet governance dialogue in the U.K. Could I just ask how many people here are from law enforcement or would view themselves as from the security sort of side of things? I can see 3, 4. I think that this is something to bear in mind. How many people would view their working life or professional life as occupied with issues of privacy, human rights, freedom of expression, could you raise your hands? So the balance in the room is today and I think this very much is reflected in our agenda, we have got issues of trust, Human Rights, freedom of expression, the right balance with surveillance but we should be aware to have the true multistakeholder go to process for a minute that to have the true multistakeholder balance we ought to have a balance in the room of people from different professional trusts as well. Because I’m sure, you know, all of us remember and regret the awful events in Brussels so recently. But to visitors coming into the city the first thing we are seeing is trucks with soldiers in. On one level we can understand where that comes from. On another level does it make us feel frightened or does it make us feel secure? It’s a very difficult balance to strike and there are clearly some very, very evil and destructive forces at play. At the same time here in Europe we need to keep hold of our values as well. So sorry for that little just reflections based on what we are hearing. Can I go to you ma’am and then I’ll come to you.
>> So let me start by saying it’s my fifth EuroDIG in a row and I started when I was 19. So –
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Could you introduce yourself?
>> Sorry.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: I forgot to ask everyone, when you start speaking can give your name and affiliation very briefly. That helps people to place.
>> In five years I didn’t learn to introduce myself every time.
>> Everyone forgets.
>> I’m Ana, I’m from Georgia, I work for German International Corporation but at the same time I’m a student.
>> Thank you.
>> So yeah, I remember Stockholm, 2012, whenever it was and now I’m here. And I’m still here. I say that and I keep amazing how this dialogue and this platform is becoming more and more inclusive and open, and it’s experiments with different things. I mean the EuroDIG. And you never get bored. So I love to see more people every year, new faces. It makes me so glad to see that I can have a young person that we have so many in the room this year, too, and on the other side you might have deputy whatever. So it’s amazing. This is one thing. And also if you keep a close look how the whole session that awaits for you in the couple of hours how they are organized, how these working groups that have nothing to do with, I don’t know, maybe secretariat, they just will internally do the work and organize the sessions. So it’s amazing to be here. This is first. Now going back to the re-evolution thing that we all are discussing. As a young person I think that and I want to embrace this digital evolution. I don’t think it’s a revolution. I think it’s evolution. I want to embrace it. And at the same time it’s a very thin line that we are walking, especially young people who has to live on the Internet so many years now. And it’s a thin line where we might be risking some of our valuable things which, for example, is privacy and the most important thing that we also care about. And I think it’s a platform that makes young people and other people of these threats and risks that we will have to bear in mind while being online and I think we all need to discuss it more and more.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Ana, can I ask you a question? As a self identified young person, probably speaking for some of the older people in the room I feel very young but I think we have to respect the evidence.
(Laughter)
But as a young person, older people can often characterize young people as sort of not really caring about privacy. I think for some people in an older generation it seems really puzzling that young people appear to be willing to share things that older people would feel really embarrassed about sharing and they do so publicly. And yet you say we care about privacy. Can you explain how the two things coexist?
>> We care about privacy. I don’t know. My fellows wouldn’t say so. They are happy to share whatever they have.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Who do they think they’re sharing with?
>> Public. Public. So what I say is those young people who are aware of privacy, it’s a rare thing. That’s why I say we need to get more young people involved and we need to do on local level more awareness raising to protect our privacy. If that’s our priority. So that’s not the point I was raising. Being aware of privacy is a privilege, I think, for now, nowadays. And regarding all the people, I didn’t get the question.
>> EMILY TYALOR: It’s really the same sort of question. It’s really do you think it’s a matter of awareness raising or do you think it’s actually the newer generation have different attitudes about what they share or is it they don’t realize?
>> I think people and humans have always been social creatures and we always like to share well we don’t share the same things. We haven’t been sharing the same stuff always and in the same manners but once we got these tools to share, that’s why we became more social. It’s not that it wasn’t inside of us. I believe that 200 centuries ago people were willing to share things, that’s why they would gather around the fire many, many centuries ago and share stories. That’s why my grandma was organizing their friend circle, they will sit and talk and share. Nowadays it became more because we have more tools. With a few clicks we can share as many things as we want.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you. I suppose the difference between your grandmother or perhaps you when you are a grandmother is you’ll be looking back at the exact chat messages that you had now and they will still be there.
>> Digital footsteps, yes.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: That’s right.
>> Good morning, I’m the director of the Internet jurisdiction. I wanted to piggyback on what the exchange after Marco’s comment is the Internet more centralized or more decentralized. When you made the question to the room I raised my hand twice which may show that I’m a little bit confused. But the reason is the way it has evolved is it is at the same time more centralized and more decentralized. Because the Internet is growing and the services are growing you have at the same time huge concentration on the one hand and an increasing number of very small actors. And I was prompted to make this comment because it is related to the reconciliation that needs to take place between certain principals. And as Goran Marby was rightly saying earlier discussions at EuroDIG and in the IGF is about shaping or framing the debates. In many cases we have a tendency and Frank La Rue alluded to that as well to frame discussions in terms of balancing acts. It’s privacy versus security. It’s a lot of things. This is something that always looks like it’s a game at best where you have to sacrifice something to get something else. What I just wanted to highlight is this example about is the Internet more centralized or more decentralized shows that both can be true at the same time and in many case what’s is at stake is to reconcile different objectives, to make sure that we get the best of a positive game and when we are framing topics it’s usually how we it’s better to say how can we combine, for instance, global accessibility to content and respect to national legislations regarding the diversity of what is allowed and what is not allowed in countries. How do we protect privacy and protect the individual protect people, basically, and provide law enforcement you were mentioning with the appropriate tools to fight abusers and misuse? Once again, just highlighting whenever we discuss things tries to think in terms of reconciling rather than balancing.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. Ma’am?
>> Good morning. I’m from the German centre for child protection on the Internet. I would like to thank the organizers for starting the EuroDIG with an open mic sessions. The topic I would like to refer to is the Internet of Things. We heard in some statements that it was already mentioned. And when we have a look at the Internet population, we see that one in three Internet users today is under the age of 18. When it comes to developing countries it’s one in two. We see also that children are using the Internet at a very young age starting from one year or from three months as we heard. And in parallel with we see that many services and products are addressing directly this young target group. So I think it’s necessary to consider how we can ensure the safety and the privacy of these young users when we parallel and see the Internet of Things and sometimes I prefer to say the Internet of toys instead of things for the IoT because there are so many of these services.
(clapping)
thanks. With my organization we have done some research into the principal of safety by design in the last year. And what we have learned comparing or seeing parallels to privacy by design to the interest of accessibility by design is we can learn when the needs of certain target groups are taken in consideration from the very beginning of the development of the products and services then the needs of these target groups can be better addressed, we can achieve better products and better safeties with a principal safety by design. So I would like the turn attention to the technical aspects that can help us to ensure safety. I think if you asked the question how many people feel related to safety, much more would have taken up their hands instead of the security people.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Why don’t you ask that question, how many people are concerned about safety online? Thank you for raising that.
>> So I think that could be a huge topic to talk about.
>> There have been a couple of high profile hacks of toys. Do you think those are helpful for manufacturers, IoT, to raise awareness of some of the safety issues?
>> Yeah, on the one hand it’s raising awareness of the safety issues and the hacking can also help the product developers better to understand where they can make their products more secure products. But it’s not only about raising awareness. When it comes to the very young users, they just give away data without knowing that. If you use Internet of Things many products you certainly don’t know whether it gives away data or not.
>> Do you think it changing with manufacturers? My impression is lots of Internet of Things people are just desperate to get to market. And things like this might seem to hold them back or delay them at cost.
>> That’s exactly what the principal of safety by design is about because if you consider it from the very beginning of the idea of the product, it’s much easier to build it in than when you go through the process that maybe you consider it could be hacked and you try to build in the safety afterwards. So it must be from the very beginning.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you. Ma’am?
>> Hello. I am the newly elected chair for the steering committee on media and Information Society at the Council of Europe. I am at home the director of a media authority in Iceland. I am really happy to see how the EuroDIG has evolved. I came to the first EuroDIG in 2008 in Strasbourg, and it is really amazing to see the development, the participation, all the new faces that I’m seeing here now so that is very good. It is working as a chair for an intergovernmental Steering Committee; we are dealing with many issues. For example, Human Rights aspects of algorithms, updating a Human Rights guidelines of ISP’s, things that are very important. But of course this is not something that can happen in a vacuum just by talking to other governmental representatives. So this is the reason why I think it’s extremely important to be here to listen to other groups of people, to have a multistakeholder dialogue on all these issues, to hear what the industry is saying, the Civil Society, the academia and so forth. And so that is kind of the purpose of being here, to listen and also to be inclusive. Thank you.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. We are now coming into the last 15 minutes of this open mic session. And I can see I’ve got at least seven speakers. Can I just encourage to you brisk and crisp. Anyone who does want to make an intervention this is your moment. If there’s anything that I forget to mention that we need to cover now, thank you. So please go ahead and I’m going to come to you and then you.
>> Well thank you, I’m going to be very brief. I’m also working at the Council of Europe on matters related to international governance. When we speak of multistakeholder governance and Internet governance do we mean the same thing? At the end of the day each citizen is a stakeholder in Internet governance and should have a seat at the table. Inclusiveness, decentralization are extremely important. I think we should bring this democrat dimension a little higher on the agenda. Yesterday I participated in a very interesting session knowing where somebody suggested that libraries should be used as public spaces to improve media literacy and enable people in more decentralized spaces to participate in these matters and I think it’s a very interesting proposal so I look forward to the discussions here and I would like to learn more about how can we decentralize Internet governance and make it more participatory.
>> This is my first year at EuroDIG. I want to make two quick points both of which have to do with the evolution of the Internet. The first one is about the process here at this EuroDIG. I really implore everyone to avoid what some people have already echoed which is binary thinking. This whole idea for instance that cyber security and privacy are mutually exclusive. If that’s the case then we need to work harder, we need to make more effective solutions by collaborating. If that’s the case, let’s keep doing it. The second point is for future EuroDIGs and other Internet governance related things period. The power of mentoring, there’s so much going on in this community, there are so many young people in particular that are not involved, they don’t know how to get involved. I really implore in community, especially the decision makers, the policy makers, the people making that are signing off the budgets, et cetera, that please prioritize youth mentorship, take us under your wing and help us get involved into this process. It is critical to the future of this community and to the future of the Internet. Thank you.
(Applause)
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. Come to you and then to you.
>> I’m Richard tilt from the Internet watch foundation which is a U.K. organization dedicated to combating the very serious problem of child sexual abuse material on the Internet. I have sadly to report that the volume of such material seems to be growing. We are now dealing with about 100,000 reports per year and of course each of those reports may contain tens, hundreds, thousands of images. The material that we are dealing with and which we work on those 100,000 the vast majority we are able to get either removed or blocked and that is our mission. But the material, the majority of it involves children under 12. Some of it will involve children as young as two. It involves images of rape, torture, a variety of sexual perversions. It is very serious material because it is criminal and we are instrumental in some cases in assisting faced with intelligence that can lead to prosecution. I make the intervention simply to remind people of the very serious abuses. I know there are people in the room aware of it but there are others who may be not. As an organization we are committed to the freedom of expression but we believe that there needs to be boundaries and limits to deal with what is actually an extremely serious problem.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. Richard, before you go, are you seeing I’m conscious of time but we are talking about the revolution and evolution. How is the sharing of child sexual abuse images, how is that how is that evolving? You said it’s growing. So how is it changing?
>> It’s growing on the public web. Of course it’s an evolution that has taken place over the last few years is the pedophiles on the darkweb.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: The darkweb isn’t something that has been mentioned by many people and an evolving picture, thank you.
>> Hello. I’m also a member of the media summer school. I would like to go back to the earlier discussion about privacy and someone said young people don’t care about privacy. We would like to strongly oppose that. We care dearly about privacy. When I say privacy we are not just talking about sharing your meals on Instagram but actual privacy. There are many people around the world where sometimes their lives hang on privacy, like Civil rights activists. I’m coming from Istanbul, Turkey, and it’s very real. I can’t say in enough. Privacy is crucial and important and it’s definitely on youth’s agenda. We have key messages. Mass surveillance violates Human Rights. Alternative tools for law enforcement exist which are compatible with Human Rights. There are other things we care about like geo blocking and open access youth participation and net neutrality. Since we have a short amount of time I won’t get into all that. And yeah we care about privacy.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much.
(Applause)
Okay. Should we do bump, bump, bump.
>> I’m here with the new media summer school as well. Again, there was a comment around the attitude of young people towards privacy. The word attitude is a weapon used to beat down young people and pull us in a corner saying yeah, attitude, that’s how they are. But let’s talk about the word attitude. Attitude comes from our environment. Our environments when we are young as children are at school and home. Maybe it’s about time we started talking about privacy and Internet in education. But discussing the idea of privacy, not talking to strangers online as well as offline, then our attitudes will change and then our behaviors will change and then we may be perceived as a bigger issue. It’s a great session on empowerment in education. If anybody wants to have a conversation about how about us as policy makers and decision makers how would we instill privacy in education? Thank you.
>> Thank you, very much.
(Applause)
>> EMILY TAYLOR: And thank you the last speakers for coming back so strongly with a voice in privacy for young people. I’m sure we will be discussing more in the next day or two about whether people’s what they’re doing online is changing in the light of what we now know and how we are evolving our response. Marc and then Nigel.
>> Thank you, Emily. Good morning, my name is Marc; I’m from the United Kingdom government department for media and sport. We lead on digital strategy. Many of the issues that are going to be covered here at EuroDIG. I wanted to pick up on the point raise earlier on that it’s vitally important for these multistakeholder forum processes to have the participation of governments. We from the U.K. are here, actually there are three of us, there’s my colleague Paul and Nick. And I’ve attended most EuroDIGs. And there are other government representatives here but probably not enough. It’s important for us to be here to learn, to understand the perspectives from other stakeholder constituencies, to hear what is coming down the track, to understand the points of contention with government policies. So it’s vitally important that we are here. And I would invite the non government stakeholders here from private sector, from Civil Society, from consumer groups, rights groups and so on who have the opportunity to interact with government at the national level to impress on their government the importance of participating here in EuroDIG, of supporting national IGFs which will contribute to the EuroDIG in the European context which in turn contributes to the global IGF. And government people should be there at the global IGF just as they should be here. Every government should be here. That’s the message I’d like to convey. And the success and the evolution of the multistakeholder intergovernance environment.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: The message from Marc is all governments should be here, whether or not they’re members of the European Union.
>> That’s right. And we will continue to be here in the future, what happens.
(Applause)
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you. Nigel?
>> Thank you, very much. It’s a great pleasure to follow Marc. I used to be able to say I’m from the British government. So all governments should be here, yes, indeed. All governments should be here. But are all stakeholders in government led institutions? Where are all the stakeholders? The government group of experts discuss cyber security? Where are all the stakeholders in some of the European discussions that take place on surveillance, on cyber security, on privacy? Not all stakeholders are always in the room. In ICANN on Internet governance and ICANN is just a part of the ecosystem, multistakeholder is sort of a given. Everyone takes part. The Internet governance forum is an incredible vehicle for multistakeholder participation. This is not replicated across all areas. And surely we are losing the value of some of the input from the stakeholders, some of the knowledge, some of the experience, in some of these issues if we discuss cyber security, if we discuss surveillance, if we discuss privacy behind closed doors then sometimes we must be losing the expertise and the knowledge of stakeholders. So I think at this IGF let’s debate these issues, let’s debate cyber security and privacy. Of course young people care with privacy, of course young people care about everything, go to all the IGFs we have had, look what happened, the young people came, they debated the future of the Internet. Yes, everyone cares. But people need a voice. And the institutions, the governments, the Internet international government organizations need to listen to those voices. Thank you.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much.
(Applause)
So who says Englishmen aren’t passionate?
(Laughter)
This very timely wraps up the initial open mic in time for coffee which I think is a priority. Certainly for me. Thank you deeply, thank you for all of your participation here. It was so good to see so many voices. We have one more. Very quick. Do you want to make an intervention? Please go ahead.
>> Hello. My name is Narina. We have been working in the field of young people and children and we have been trying to protect young people from harm on the Internet. And since today we are speaking about digital evolution and digital revolution, I would like to just call everyone, let’s think and develop and adopt a comprehensive approach which will help us to respect both children’s opportunities as well as their protection from harm. Let’s not forget about safety matters when we provide children with ICTs and at the same time let’s prioritize children’s rights, their right to information, right to self expression and right to participation when we develop safety practices.
>> EMILY TAYLOR: Thank you, very much. Thank you. So I think that does bring our session to an end. Did you want to say something? It’s now the coffee break until 11:30. I’m sorry for people who wanted to say something, we have run out of time but I really thank you for all of your inputs and particularly those who haven’t been to an IGF before, you’re all welcome and this is a dialogue so let the dialogue continue over the next two days.
(Applause)