List of all 96 topic proposals
Back to: Thematic fields
- red are from cluster Surveillance, privacy and related topics
- yellow are from clusterOpenness, rights and access
- green are from cluster Innovation, business and entrepreneurship
- blue are from cluster Regulation, legal frameworks and jurisdiction
- gray are from clusterMedia, content and services
- white are others or Non-European proposals
|No||Name||Affil./Org.||SH-group||Topic and sub-issues||Description||Remarks|
|1||Eyvaz Alishov||Ministry of communications an IT, Azerbaijan||Government||The Future of Cybercrime and Cyberterrorism
How software vulnerabilities become tools for crime
|2||Kamal Faridi||22 Four, Pakistan||Civil Society||Social Causes like Rape, Child Abuse, Minor Rapes
1. Counselling, crisis
2. Training and awareness programmes to civil society
3. Advocating for law reform with partners in the sector
|(non-European submission and topic)|
|3||Atoyan Arman||X-TECH, Armenia||Youth||Citizen reporting for making better life, citizens can report about different kind of issues and with help of mobile technology their issues can be immediately transferred to the government...
||CityBugs.am is a social platform developed to raise socially critical issues where anyone has a real opportunity to raise and bring attention to daily issues of their communities for suggestions and innovative ideas to increase public participation, decision making and participatory problem solving is a platform where you can make a suggestion and track how the raised issue is solved.|
|4||Dirk Krischenowski||Dot-Berlin, Germany||Business||Geographic Top-Level Domains (GeoTLDs) between Profitableness and Public Interest Duration
||The new GeoTLDs are in a stress field between a mandatory and sustainable profitableness and public interests of the local government. Also the governing framework is often different for the ccTLDs.|
|5||Rolf Weber||Zurich University, Switzerland||.Academia||Research Workshops||Giganet Side event|
|6||Frederic Donck||Internet Society ISOC, Europe||Technical Community||Open standards and governance
||1. Open Standards & Public Policy/Governance
2. Privacy & Data Protection
3. Privacy And Mass Surveillance
4. Local Content And Copyright
5. Net Neutrality
6. Privacy And New Business Models
|7||Matthias C. Kettemann||University Frankfurt, Germany||Academia||Privacy, data protection and surveillance
||(Data is the new currency. Countries collect it, companies store it ... but how can we ensure that transboundary data flows are regulated in a human rights consistent way -- Panel on issues related to jurisdiction, privacy and data protection. We\'ll look at questions like: Which entities are responsible? Who has jurisdiction? Do we need a new concept of jurisdiction and responsibility?|
|8||Janne Elvelid||Committee for Digitization, Sweden||Govern. Org.||The unbalance of data -- How our lives are shaped based on data. Unbalance between individuals and governments / businesses in terms of access to and control over personal data.||The digitals aspects of our lives have gone from simple, definable and isolated to become large, important and complex parts integrated to all aspects of our lives. This renders enormous quantities of data that in turn are shaping our lives and the world we meet. Today we have a situation where the power over how this world around us lies in the hands of governments and businesses, not in the hands of individuals. This balance has to be leveled out. We will shape education, media, services and most things of our lives based on data. We need to make sure that individuals have the right and possibility to access and alter data about themselves, to be able to control their own life.|
|9||Christoforos Pavlakis||Bophana Audiovisual Resource Center||Civil Society||Privacy and security in Internet||Big Data
Internet of Things
MOOCs and education reform
|10||Gry Hasselbalch Lapenta||The Thinktank Digital Youth, Denmark||Youth||Revisiting the privacy discourse targeted youth -- How do we nuance the discourse of privacy initiatives targeted youth? How do we build informed knowledge and awareness about privacy today?
||Two recent surveys conducted by the thinktank Digital Youth in 2013 (www.digitaleunge.dk), illustrate that social strategies to preserve their privacy is essential to their use of social media. However, they generally appear unaware and unconcerned about the flow of private data “behind the scenes”. They repeat stories they have heard about surveillance, “super computers” and “Snowden”, but privacy is for them connected with social contexts and close relations with family and friends. Their understanding of privacy reflects to a large extend privacy campaigns and educational initiatives about the representation and branding of oneself online. It is time to move beyond basic understandings of privacy to develop a more sophisticated understanding among youth of data flow and privacy.|
|11||Gry Hasselbalch Lapenta||The Thinktank Digital Youth, Denmark||Youth||When the public sphere became private -- What kind of public democratic sphere do we aim for? How has it evolved? How are rights limited? And responsibilities expanded?
||The public sphere is evolving into a predominantly privately owned and commercial space. Young people are learning and interacting in a public sphere where “public” rules and rights to a certain extend are limited or do not apply. Two recent surveys conducted by the Danish thinktank Digital Youth in 2013 (www.digitaleunge.dk) illustrate how social media today have become the infrastructure of young people’s social everyday lives. They also perceive social media profiles as an inseparate extension of themselves into this new type of public sphere and they generally accept that in order to be part of the public social sphere, they must consent to give up their right to further use of their data.|
|12||Jordi Iparraguirre||ISOC Catalonia, Spain||Technical community||Privacy and anonymity in the digital and "analogic" world: Right to anonimity on the Internet, privacy by default. Habeas (meta/data). Eduicating citizens.||Anonymity is key for free speech and, like any other tool, it may be used als ofor crime. As the good will of people has been abused, we do need a more clear scenario on it\'s use, and controlling goverments and law enforcement.
- Are backdoors legal for law enforcement? Then, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? How?
|13||Sorina Teleanu||Chamber of Deputies, Parliament of Romania||Govern. Org.||Privacy and data protection for European citizens beyond European borders -- how to ensure that the privacy and data protection rights of European citizens are protected beyond European borders? What actions to be taken? By whom?||There are relatively high standards in the field of privacy and data protection at the EU and Council of Europe level. But are they enough when it comes to protecting the European citizens rights to privacy and data protection beyond European borders? Are the existing bilateral agreements in this area (Safe Harbor,PNR,TFTP etc) ensuring an adequate level of protection for these rights? What to do at European and international level in order to ensure that these rights are better protected outside European borders, when it comes to both the private sector (transborder data flows between companies, data stored outside Europe etc.) and the public entities in third countries (requests for data of European citizens or secret collection of data related to the online activities of European citizens)?|
|14||Susie Hargreaves||Internet Watch Foundation, UK||Civil Society||Self-Regulation and Human Rights -- How do you ensure that self-regulatory bodies are human rights compliant?||What are the challenges, check and balances?
What are the advantages and disadvantages of self-regulation on the internet?
Can good practice be universally applied?
|15||Leonid Todorov||Coordination Center for TLDs for Russia||Technical community||Internet Governance - a Changing Landscape||Privacy: The Thick Red Line -- With recent disclosures and "revelations", the issue of privacy has been debated at all fora and on all levels. Can we hammer out a universal solution and make sure there is no Peeping Tom around? What kind of instrument could be crafted on the international level and how it could be made effective in preventing privacy breaches?|
|16||Nir Kshetri||University of North Carolina —Greensboro, USA||Academia||International institutional frameworks related to cybersecurity||Are existing frameworks effective to deal with cyber-conflicts? What are strengths/weaknesses of treaties/informal cooperation? How to deal with countries with different cybersecurity/diplomatic ties?||(speaker self-promotion)|
|17||Xianhong Hu||UNESCO||Intern. Org.||Global Internet governance framework and principles -- UNESCO draft new concept on Internet Universality.||UNESCO is canvassing a draft new concept of “Internet Universality”. For the Internet to fulfill its historic potential, it needs to achieve fully-fledged “Universality” based upon the strength and interdependence of the following: (i) the norm that the Internet is Human Rights-based, (ii) the norm that it is “Open”, (iii) the norm that highlights “Accessible to All”, and (iv) the norm that it is nurtured by Multi-stakeholder Participation. The “Internet Universality” concept has very specific value for UNESCO. As regards global debates on Internet governance, it can help UNESCO facilitate international multi-stakeholder cooperation, and highlight what the Organization can bring to the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda.||(not a specific European but IGF topic)|
|18||Sabine Verheyen||European Parliament||Europ. Org.||Media Convergence & the future of audio-visual media||Platform definition and regulation/net neutrality/media specific regulations in the context of technical convergence/specialized services. See my own-initiative report: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bCOMPARL%2bPE-522.809%2b01%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN|
|19||Sivasubramanian Muthusamy||Internet Society India Chennai||Technical community||Europe for Free and Open Internet||On the Theme: Role of Europe as a continent of people who value Liberty, Equality and Oneness in leading the rest of the World to embrace policies that would keep the Internet free and open. A specific proposal: EuroDig 2014 could examine the effect of Europe\'s policies and positions on Nations outside Europe. What are the good and bad examples of Europe\'s policy positions concerning the Internet?|
|20||Matthias Flittner||KIT / research assistant||Academia.||We need transparent cyber security for humanity||What does security mean?
Threats in a cyber context?
Verification of cyber security.
What is about NSA, GHCQ?
Transparent provable easy guarantees.
New transport / internet technologies.
|21||Matthias Flittner||KIT / research assistant||Academia||Secure Cloud Computing for critical infrastructure providers||Legal and liability aspects of cloud computing Requirements of critical infrastructure. Risks and threats of cloud computing for critical infrastructures. How to make the cloud transparent to the user.|
|22||Xianhong Hu||UNESCO||Intern. Org.||Promote freedom of expression and privacy on Internet -- Role of Internet intermediaries in promoting online human rights such as freedom of expression and privacy||Internet intermediaries play a unique role in linking authors of content and audiences. They may either protect or jeopardize end user rights to free expression, given their role in capturing, storing, searching, sharing, transferring and processing large amount of information, data and user-generated content. It is important to identify principles for good practices and processes that are consistent with international standards for free expression that Internet intermediaries may follow in order to protect the human rights of end users online.|
|23||Stuart Hamilton||International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA)||Civil society||The Internet and Development: Access, Inclusion and Empowerment -- Public access to ICTs – Access to information for all – The post-2015 development framework||Within an IG context IFLA has consistently advocated for public access to ICTs as a key enabling element for access to information and therefore for development. We propose that this issue be explored in its broadest context at EuroDIG, against the backdrop of the post-2015 development framework that UN Member States will create following the reviews of the MDGs and WSIS. EuroDIG should assess how IG can contribute to the framework particularly as ALL Member States (not just developing countries) will be developing policies to implement the post-2015 framework in the coming years.|
|24||Susanne von Mohnsdorff||Federal Ministry of the interior, Germany||Govern. Org.||Questions of legal interoperability and the prospects of global data protection -- “Global Players - European Privacy?” -- “Dispute Resolution and Data Protection Law”||Discussion on questions of legal interoperability and the prospects of global data protection (among others, the role of the General Data Protection Regulation, the Council of Europe Convention 108, Safe Harbour and global data protection principles) and on the question of how to improve the protection of users and the enforcement of their rights in the online world, e.g. by increasing the accountability of service providers and providing mandatory conflict settlement mechanisms.|
|25||Per-Erik Wolff||ARD (German Public Service Broadcaster)||Media||How to secure internet platform neutrality -- How can we safeguard the fulfilment of the democratic functions of journalistic content providers on internet platforms. By securing e.g. equal access, equal chances to be found and signal integrity?||Both new (e.g. blogs) and established (e.g. broadcasters) journalistic content suppliers play a vital role in modern democracies because they contribute to the citizens’ forming of political will. However, platforms and manufacturers of end devices have become new gatekeepers. These gatekeepers are able to control access of internet users to media content. They also control media content providers’ access to the gatekeepers’ platforms. It is crucial for modern democracies to prevent these gatekeepers from discriminating certain media content providers against others, e.g. by charging for access and/or for a privileged ranking on graphic interfaces. It is also crucial that media suppliers’ signals are not touched to make sure that journalistic content remains trustworthy for the users.|
|26||Susanne von Mohnsdorff||Federal Ministry of the Interior, Germany||Govern. Org||The availability of information on the Internet --
Exhibition of Results of the competition “Forgetting on the Internet” in addition to "Global Players-European Privacy?" and "Dispute Resolution and Data Protection Law".
|This competition launched by the Federal Ministry of the Interior and the National Academy of Science and Engineering in 2012 triggered a major debate on the availability of information on the Internet. This debate has focused not so much on technical details, but on the appropriate awareness of the possibilities and risks presented by the Internet. Essays, poems, collages, videos and technical ideas on the different categories were received. A selection of contributions could be exhibited at EuroDIG to show that society closely follows this issue. Furthermore, they also serve as an appeal to political decision-makers to make use of this potential. Hence, the exhibition could serve as a meaningful complement to the expert panel discussions and take up relevant issues.|
|27||Laura-Lee Smith||SRH Hochschule Berlin||Academia.||Human rights||Cyberattacks and cybersecurity concerns; data protection; standardization of internet principles and freedoms; governance accountability. This report is for scientific, observation research on the legitimacy of internet governance multi-stakeholder processes in 2014.|
|28||Paul Fehlinger||Internet & Jurisdiction project, France||Academia||.How to maintain the universality and openness of the Internet? Can different legal norms coexist In Cyberspace or will the Internet fragment?||In the absence of appropriate frameworks, a trend towards a creeping fragmentation of the Internet is already observed around the world. Uncoordinated and potentially incompatible solutions emerge in different jurisdictions (new “data sovereignty” laws, national clouds, redirections to national ccTLDs, local offices obligations etc.) How to ensure the digital coexistence of heterogeneous laws and values in online spaces is thus becoming a core challenge for international organi-zations, states, platforms, technical operators and users in Europe. How can frameworks be developed to prevent such a fragmentation? What are the merits of different approaches such as harmonization, treaties, guidelines, standards or enhanced multi-stakeholder cooperation that are currently explored?|
|29||Milton Mueller||Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)||Academia||State Surveillance on the Internet -- Internet technical standards and end user security||Deep packet inspection (DPI) cooperation between ISPs and national security agencies.
Localization as a response to NSA surveillance.
Independent academic researchers and technical experts should explore how Internet governance processes have reacted to the Snowden revelations. The session should not debate whether the surveillance is good or bad, but describe the changes its explosure has provoked in several areas. Three areas of change need to be covered:
1. IETF moves to \"harden\" Internet technical standards.
2. DPI surveillance programs that involve cooperation between private Internet service providers and national security agencies
3. Proposed policies to localize or nationalize services, equipment or routing
GigaNet is able to provide experts in each of these areas.
|30||Narine Khachatryan||Media Education Center, Armenia||Academia||Media and Digital Literacy||The need to expand the scope of Media & Digital Literacy Programs with regard to new technological & social challenges posed by evolving digital environments. Information overload & web personalisation, marketing on children & targeted advertizing, new mechanisms for constructing and manufacturing realities. What competencies should be developed in knowledge societies?|
|31||Lidia de Reese||fragFINN e.V. / non-profit, Germany||Youth||Positive Content and Services for Young People
- support and promote good content and services for children
- kids’ participation
- encourage sustainability
|Positive online content & services allow children to explore the Internet in a safe way and offer them the opportunity to learn, have fun, be creative and discover new abilities. The key questions focus on characteristics of positive content and how to publicly promote it and support its producers: What can producers of online content for children do to provide them with positive experiences and make it accessible to their target group? How can online content and services enable children to express their thoughts and opinions in a creative way and to participate in societal activities (civic, political)? What does it take to strengthen the internet landscape for children, to inspire more quality content, to promote it among children, parents and teachers and to ensure long-lasting funding?|
|32||Martin Drechsler||FSM Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Multimedia Diensteanbieter e.V. / fragFINN, Germany||Business||Better Internet for kids
- multi-stakeholder responsibility
- societal engagement
- media education
|For years, creating a better Internet for kids has been an overarching topic for policy makers, companies, institutions and citizens throughout Europe. As it is a topic of great relevance for all of us, fruitful discussions should also be expected outside the traditional child protection communities and ideally initiate an approach of shared responsibility and engagement among all relevant stakeholders.|
|33||Mario Oetheimer||EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)||Europ. Org.||Challenges of cyberhate||The internet can easily be used as a platform for hate and harassment. FRA research has shown that online hate crime is of particular concern. Recent FRA surveys (EU LGBT Survey, FRA survey on gender-based violence against women and FRA survey on discrimination and hate crimes against Jews) provide data supporting this. EURODIG should address this issue and provide a platform of discussion and possibly concrete follow-up actions that various stakeholders could agree upon. While FRA could provide a presentation of its survey data, a multi-stakeholder discussion could look into solutions and good practices to reduce the level of hate on the internet.|
|34||Martin Drechsler||FSM Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Multimedia Diensteanbieter e.V. / fragFINN, Germany||Business||Child Safety
- parental control: awareness, discussion, accessibility, acceptance
- technical, machine-readable age labels
- protection vs censorship
- the role of parents
- safety by design.
|Child protection and freedom of speech and information seem equally relevant. Technical means can help (FSM video: http://youtu.be/lq0X-Baf7_g) when used wisely. It is time to broaden the view and to share the discussion with a wider audience.
|35||Jutta Croll||I-KiZ, Zentrum fÃ¼r Kinderschutz im Internet||Govern. Org.||Intelligent risk management in a mobile online environment -- How can adults in charge of minors fulfil their duty of parenting while at the same time respecting the rights of the child?||Joint proposal by I-KiZ, klicksafe and Google. Broadband infrastructure anywhere and high usability of tablets and smart phones are driving the fast growing mobile Internet usage among children and youths. Adults in charge of minors are asking for technical support to protect their children. But young people too are holding fundamental human rights like privacy and freedom of speech. With parental control tools often monitoring of children\'s usage habits comes along that is an intolerable intrusion into their privacy. Intelligent risk management should comprise both: protection of children and empowerment of youths. To be discussed: the current educational situation in families, media literacy of parents, parental control tools, new strategies like Safety by Design and the legal framework of children’s rights and parents duties.|
|36||Helena Cebrian||iCmedia||Civil society||Children protection
|We would like Eurodig to include minor’s protection among the different topics of this year’s agenda. iCmedia supports that websites aimed at children should introduce some sort of content labeling or rating system which would help parents and school teachers likewise. This tool would help tutors and parents decide whether an online content is suitable for their children, as it happens with movies’ rating system in some European countries. We would also like to discuss about EPG (electronic program guides) for direct TV and other new ways of TV broadcasting. Certain rules would help users avoid undesirable content. Modern, easy-to-use and useful warning systems should be implemented. Media literacy in schools and in other stages of life is today more needed than ever before.|
|37||Karsten Wenzlaff||ikosom / German Crowdfunding Network, Germany||Academia||Crowdfunding, its potential to create innovations through funding on the net, and its upcoming regulation in Europe||How can Crowdfunding stimulate innovation in research, technology and governance and create better governance in the European public sector? The EU Commission has asked for contributions on the regulation of Crowdfunding. ikosom has written a number of Crowdfunding studies.
We also initiated a German Crowdfunding Network of platsforms, supporters and researchers in Germany, Austria and Siwitzerland. We think that Crowdfunding can motivate stakeholders in public processes to engage in these mechanism, while also helping to provide an alternative way of funding for the creative industries, startups and technology companies. However, we also believe that regulation is immament. Since most of the Crowdfunding activties are done online, we think it would be better to have Civil Society discuss these issues before the national regulators step in.
|38||Barbara Lillu||European NGO Alliance for Child Safety Online||Civil society||Child’s Protection Online -- How the digital environment impacts on children as economic actors: implications and opportunities?||Internet is an essential element of children‘s lives. It has vast potential to positively generate new patterns of expression and communication. However, kids also experience a variety of unwanted consequences, such as Cyber-bullying and new forms of sexual predation and harassment. Less dramatic than these, though also potentially damaging, are companies’ monetization strategies that target children’s unique emotions and inexperience such as mining data to be used in tailoring ad and marketing campaigns directed at them. Currently, few restraints govern these and other kinds of questionable practices. Mindful of the importance of keeping the Internet as free as possible, it is nonetheless crucial to begin a discussion about how children might be protected from such practices.||(submitted twice)|
|39||Leonid Todorov||Coordination Center for TLDs for Russia||Technical community||The PACE report on coordination of effective Internet governance strategies.||A milestone document, the PACE Report for the first time ever is to mirror a consensus-based exhaustive set of fundamental principles, which is set for adoption in the form of Recommendation by PACE. If a success, the process should subsequently culminate in a Resolution by the Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe. It would therefore be appropriate to give the Report a reality check by discussing its main findings and recommendations by and within the EuroDig expert community and with the participation of its authors. The concrete format of the discussion is tbd. The PACE rapporteur from Russia has already agreed to take part in the event and to engage his fellow authors and PACE experts.|
|40||Margarida Ribeiro||FCT- Department of Information Society (Ministry of Education and Science), Portugal||Govern. Org.||Cities in the cloud – Think Internet Locally:
Smart cities/smart citizens
|.o Citizens involvement in new digital services creation, data management and open government;
o Cities as a real time system - transport and energy efficient networks, culture, community, conviviality;
o Transparency and better governance through eParticipation at local level;
o Multi-stakeholder model in Smart urban digital infrastructure management;
o Challenges and opportunities of City gTLDs
|41||Ana Neves||FCT- Department of Information Society (Ministry of Education and Science), Portugal||Govern. Org||How much can Europe and its countries influence Internet Governance at global level?||A discussion on:
- What have Europe and its different stakeholders been doing until now on this issue?
- Is Europe able to bridge with countries worldwide? What should its role be?
- What is Europe doing to make multi-stakeholderism clearer?
- Could Europe be considered on this discussion as a continent, as a diversity of cultures or as a multiplicity of convictions?
|42||Manuel Braga Monteiro||Deutsche Telecom AG||Business||Cybersecurity, Routing, Global Internet Principles, need for multi-lateral rules for the internet must replacing the dominant influence of few actors, protection of human rights, fundamental freedoms.||The Internet has rapidly evolved from being a newly-commercialized resource in the 1990ies to a global network. And it has become a critical infrastructure for our political, economic and social lives. All electronic communication these days is migrating to Internet protocol-based communication networks, raising new challenges in various areas like security, privacy, law enforcement, standardisation and regulation. If we want the internet to keep its open and global nature and prevent fragmentation, we cannot escape from setting globally accepted and binding rules.|
|43||Luca Belli||CERSA, Italy||Academia||Network Neutrality
1) The value of net neutrality for human rights and innovation;
2) Threats to net neutrality;
3) Solutions to safeguard net neutrality
|Net neutrality, defined as the transmission of Internet traffic without undue discrimination, restriction or interference, helps to ensure pluralism, self-determination and a level playing field in the free market of ideas and innovations. This session will ignite discussion with regard to the challenges and opportunities of net neutrality, stressing the instrumental role of such principle in order to further end-users’ interest, modernise human right and safeguard the Open Internet. (Through an interactive discussion,) panellists will explore potential solutions aimed at promoting net neutrality while analysing various regulatory solutions that have been proposed at the European level.|
||European Data Protection Reform
||1. The one-stop-shop mechanism: PRO's and CON's for consumers and businesses?
2. International data flows
1. What will be the effects of the proposed one-stop-shop mechanism? What has to be changed? How will consumer complaints work in the future?
2. The EU Commission proposed changes to the Safe Harbour decision with the USA. Will Safe Harbour survive? What alternatives are foreseen in the proposed regulation?
||Business models and the Internet --
There is a common view, that the "Internet is for free". Users are not aware of business models which create value e.g. from meta data.
|There needs to be means in place which allow each user of the internet to understand the interest of each stakeholder (network provider, regulator, application service provider et.al). Governments articulate this by creating laws and implementing respective means to enforce such laws. The private sector has no obligations to clearly state the methods and models for executing their business. This violates the basic ideas of a multi-stakeholder governance and shall be analysed and corrected.|
||FU Berlin, Germany
||States and Internet Governance
- legitimacy of internet governance through IGF
(constituionalisation of internet governance)
- discourse of information
- International law for information exchange
- North-South Imbalances
|The process to constituionalise a global „information space“ started under the League system, continued under the early UN, proceeded into UNESCO in the 1970s (NWICO), and is still at large today under the label of internet governance (WSIS, IGF). The notion that the flow of information necessarily has to be free is deeply ingrained in the genes of public discourse. Although media policy has remained a „normal“ tool of state(s), information beyond each national border has remained wholly unregulated, as demonstrated not only by Google, but also NSA’s Boundless Informant. Recently, the German and Brazilian government's move to to turn privacy laws into international law have marked a (re)new(ed) move to constituionalise information.|
|47||Marcel Neuber||HL komm Telekommunikations GmbH, Germany||Business||Tablet computer at school||How tablets and teaching apps make learning a better way? Which apps are the right ones? Are our teachers ready for the new way of learning/teaching? Who pays the bill? HL komm is a common carrier (internet Provider) and a wifi partner. We have the possibility to connect schools to the faster Internet. We are interested in the future of our educational system and want to be a part of this. In the Netherlands there is a Project calls Steve Jobs Schools - is this the future of our educational System?||(much reference to company marketing)|
|48||Marcel Neuber||HL komm Telekommunikations GmbH, Germany||Business||Smart metering and smart home –
Is smart metering the future of energy Monitoring and a important part of the energy turnaround (Energiewende)? The same question to smart home. smart grid, smart world.
|HL komm is a common carrier (internet Provider) and a wifi partner. We have the possibility to connect energy systems to the faster Internet. We are interested in the future of our energy system and want to be a part of this. what is the reason for smart metering in europe? all european countrys have a different Level in roll out smart meter. why italy, sweden and gb use smart meter, but Germany not. is the Internet the base for our smart world? (smart meter, smart grid, smart home, ...)|
|49||Marcel Neuber||HL komm Telekommunikations GmbH, Germany||Business||City Wifi networks –
are wifi Networks the future of communication in cities worldwide? for example cisco write a lot about this theme.
|(…) We have the possibility to connect cities to the faster Internet. We are interested in the future of wifi Systems in cities and want to be a part of this. How can a Company like HL komm earn Money with a City wifi or isn't Money the reason for it? Energy, traffic, healthcare, public life, e-cars, public Transport, tourism, Business, ...|
|50||Tatiana Tropina||Max-Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Germany||Academia||Internet governance - the end of multi-stakeholder approach? Cybersecurity - the end of multi-stakeholder environment? Where are the borders of multi-stakeholder?||Despite all the efforts to make cybersecurity a multi-stakeholder task, there is still a lack of trust between public and private parties, and the tendency to regulate strictly coming from government side when the issue of cybersecurity comes to the level of critical information infrastructure protection or national security and surveillance. The goal of the session is to discuss where are the borders of multi-stakeholder environment and how to build the trust and capacity (and whether it is possible to build them at all).|
|51||Tatiana Tropina||Max-Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Germany||Academia||The blurring borders between criminal law, security and intelligence - how to implement proper safeguards for human rights and data protection?
||As many discussions these days, this proposal is related to the recent revelations concerning mass surveillance and data gathering by intelligence services. Procedural measures implemented by criminal law (such as interception. collection of data) are related to crime are usually strictly regulated by safeguards, warrants, data protection rules. However, the issues of security in terms of prevention goes beyond criminal law and creates a "grey" area when security agencies can gather and monitor data without proper safeguards. This proposal suggests to discuss the issue of safeguards (human rights, data protection, etc) which have to be implemented in this "grey area" and the way of implementing them.|
|52||Marianne Franklin||IRP Coalition - UN IGF||Civil society||1) Rights and Responsibilities Online after Snowden: From Principles to Practice -- How to move from broad principles to specific practices for lawmaking & enforcement: for e.g. pursuing criminal activities, commercial 3rd party services, public services such as housing or health.||This theme looks at how international legal principles of balance, necessity and proportionality can be translated into law-making and enforcement scenarious. How and where do real-life law enforcement scenarios limit freedom of expression, association, or privacy? What can different standpoints reveal about proportionate or disproportionate responses? Are there limits to the need to know, to preventative enforcement based on predictive algorithms; when are specific types of data retention for justified, if at all, when pursuing alleged criminal activities online? Are there adequate legal-ethical frameworks to monitor these decisions, and for redress? What are the limits to meta-data and user data retention for commercial and governmental forms of service provision?|
|53||Marianne Franklin||IRP Coalition - UN IGF||Civil society||2) Right to Access: Accessibility by Design for Internet Users with Disabilities -- A closer look at the EU Accessibility Act and its implications for procurement decisions, emplacement and financing of “disability-proof” internet access at all levels.||.Broaden the understanding and definition of inclusiveness and disadvantaged groups to include: gender and sexual minorities, indigenous populations, oral communities, the homeless, youth, remote participants, and the elderly.
-identify the role of end users in discussions, research, and design of accessibility technology and policy in order to best identify how tangible needs, problems and solutions intersect among marginalized groups.
-ways to coordinate between policy makers, ministries, designers, users, and effected populations.
|54||Marianne Franklin||IRP Coalition - UN IGF||Civil society||3) Collaboration as Best Practice: Redressing Disconnects in Internet Governance Forums -- Developing synergies between regional, national, global IGFs with different priorities & organizational cultures; address need for more mutual awareness of diverse positions and priorities.||This theme addresses ongoing debates about representativeness, legitimacy, and accountability within stakeholder groups on the role of the global IGF and burgeoning national IGFs, new (e.g. Tunisia) and established (e.g. Brazil). Regional IGFs take place independently despite need to identify common narratives and issues. Aim to create ways to generate awareness and knowledge-sharing beyond reporting back or documenting best practice; location and sharing of resources, research, points of contention and agreement between and amongst participating groups; address any democratic deficits in organization of different IGF by identifying robust forms of diverse and broad-based participation in preparation and running of these meetings, and official outputs.|
|55||Yuliya Morenets||TaC-Together against Cybercrime International, France||Civil society||Internet and social aspects -- Social responsibility of actors; The role of private sector; Disadvantaged groups in the Information Society & HR.||We recommend discussing the issue of social responsibility of different actors in the Information Society, especially with regard to disadvantaged groups. We propose to engage in a close discussion with private sector and launch a multi-stakeholder dialogue on what needs to be done and how we could achieve the objective of better integration of vulnerable/disadvantaged groups in the Information Society in the respect of human rights and fundamental principles.|
|56||Oliver Sueme||EuroISPA||Business, Europ. Org.||The Rule of Law as a subject of Multi-stakeholderism and Internet Governance -- Role of the Internet Intermediaries in the focus of Law Enforcement and Surveillance.||With the spread of Internet use, public sector authorities, secret services and private companies are increasingly attempting to co-opt Internet intermediaries as their enforcement and security agents. The Intermediaries are in the focus of this development. While they are responsible for the security of their services on the one hand, they are more and more in the focus of law enforcement agencies, secret services and private companies on the other hand. Is there a need to redesign the European policy paradigms and bring them back within the boundaries of the rule of law? What is the role of intermediaries? Should the balance between the interests of law enforcement authorities, intermediaries and users of the internet be an aspect of the multi-stakeholder-model?|
|57||Hubert Schoettner||BMWi, Germany||Govern. Org||Open Internet and Net Neutrality -- Recent Developments and outlook regarding the theme „Open Internet and Net Neutrality“, in particular concerning the ongoing legislative deliberations on the European level.||On 12 September 2013, the European Commission presented the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down measures concerning the European single market for electronic communications and to achieve a Connected Continent. The proposal touches on several areas of telecommunication policy, including net neutrality. The legislative process has already started, but it is likely that the legislative deliberations will not be finalized in June 2014. Therefore it seems to be of interest to inform the EuroDIG participants about the legislative process and give some room for reflections and discussions.|
|58||Jorge Fernandes||FCT- Department of Information Society (Ministry of Education and Science), Portugal||Govern. Org.||How to improve web accessibility in the EU? A common observatory could be the next step? Is the EN 301549 "Accessibility requirements for public procurement of ICT products and services in Europe" the section 508 of Europe? Why Web accessibility levels are so low in Europe?||14 years after the Summit of Feira in 2000 - Portuguese EU Presidency - (eEurope2002) we can say that the way how ME approach the Web accessibility issue wasn’t effective. The Draft EN 301549 "Accessibility requirements for public procurement of ICT products and services in Europe" that is going put to vote in the beginning of 2014, places again the issue of the ICT public procurement. It’s about tread a path already experienced in the USA with the "section 508 of the ADA" that it seems to have brought good results, but not in the Web issue. Concerning Web more pragmatism is needed. Is it necessary to put the emphasis on the analysis methodology, on the monitoring and in a kind of common observatory system in permanence?|
|59||Hubert Schoettner||BMWi, Germany||Govern. Org.||Outlook on ITU Plenipotentiary 2014 and WSIS follow-up -- EuroDIG 2014 should be used to give an outlook on major conferences where internet governance issues will be discussed.||From 20 October to 7 November 2014, ITU's plenipotentiary conference will take place in Busan, Republic of Korea. Further conferences within the UN are to be expected on the WSIS+10 process. It might be interesting for European stakeholders to get an oversight on the discussion in these fora. EuroDIG is probably one of the first international conferences on Internet governance where the outcomes of the Brazil conference, that will take place in April 2014, can be reflected and discussed.|
|60||Jorge Fernandes||FCT- Department of Information Society (Ministry of Education and Science), Portugal||Govern. Org.||Switch-off of the textbooks -- The eTextBooks are potentially generators of inclusion for students with disabilities or print disabled students. Why? Is Europe preparing to switch-off the TextBooks?||The next generation of TextBooks will pass through the Internet. In Japan the switch-off is scheduled for April 2020. What about in Europe? For public with special needs in reading, the "eTextBooks" can be the step that is missing to remove this group from the classification of "Vulnerable People". The DAISY (Digital Accessible Information System) created in 1994 in Sweden, that allowed, among other things, doing a search by words in audio tracks, in 2012 achieved to merge with the ePub3, placing the accessibility technology available to the consumer mass market. The issue of the complex content digitalization, as the writing/reading of the math and music, brings new challenges.|
|61||Jorge Fernandes||FCT- Department of Information Society (Ministry of Education and Science), Portugal||Govern. Org.||Internet - the best friend of Braille in the Digital World -- Who can we blame for the low levels of braille literacy? The Internet? The ICT? A blind person who doesn’t know braille is illiterate? Does it makes sense do not learn braille in the Digital Era?||Germany is one of the countries in Europe that has more contributed for the access to the braille system: libraries with wide collections of printed Braille; manufacturers of Braille typewriters; manufacturers of Braille rotaries. But the future of the braille system doesn’t pass through the paper. The future of the braille passes through the Reading of eBraille in electronic devices. The future of the braille passes through the Internet. Is also in Germany that we can find the biggest manufacturers of electronic devices of Braille reading? Is also in Germany that universities devote their time to research new ways of reading braille in devices like tablets? In the USA only 10% of the students (K12) learn braille. Europe is better but also down.|
|62||Annnette Mühlberg||ver.di and EURALO, support by ISOC chapter Belgrade, FIfF, Afilias, Open Rights Group||Civil society and MS||Surveillance: Democracy at stake!||Surveillance by States and by Business creates monopolies of power which endanger democracy. Those new monopolies of information collection and automated evaluation endanger and undermine human rights. In order to preserve human rights and enhance their enforcement in the digital society, we need to strengthen the informational self-determination of citizens in all spheres of society, particularly leisure and consumption, health, social security, work, media, politics. Which regulatory approaches and frames are needed to ensure such "informational self-determination" of citizens and Internet users and can prevent concentration of power and eroding of democracy and rule of law? How can respective provisions be effectively enforced?|
|63||Annnette Mühlberg||Ver.di and FifF||Civil society||Public IT infrastructure - common welfare and services for the public in the digital society||There are various public services and infrastructures run by communalities, cities and the like. We observe tendencies to outsource such services in public hand so far. But substantial questions of oversight and control of such services and infrastructures – once outsourced – are neglected and open standards are not granted any more. There should be a basic principle that services and infrastructures paid by the public need to be controlled by the public (Öffentliche Daseinsvorsorge).|
|64||Klaus Birkenbihl||Internet Society German Chapter||Technical community||Net Neutrality -- ISPs seek models to promote their own (or associate) contents and applications by providing goodies by manipulating DNS.||Goodies provided are:
better connectivity for their contents extra (free) bandwidth to access their contents
- Is this in the interest of clients?
- Is this a threat for a free and open net?
In order to maintain and develop the Internet as an free and open infrastructure:
- is there a set of minimum requirements in terms of:
- fair access to the network
- traffic exchange and peering with other networks
- not boosting one contents or applications offer on the cost of others that ISPs should have to guarantee?
Do we need regulation or will the market fix it?
|65||Klaus Birkenbihl||Internet Society German Chapter||Technical community||Privacy a fundamental human right -- "International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance"||On July 13 2013, some privacy organizations and advocates from around the globe published a paper entitled "International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance" or "Necessary and Proportionate" in short. Meanwhile hundreds of organizations signed the paper. It might be a good idea to discuss if this is an adequate answer to increased surveillance activities around the world and - if so - how to boost its impact.|
|66||Michal Pukaluk||Department of Telecommunications
Ministry of Administration and Digitization, Poland
|Govern. Org||Access and diversity -- Removing barriers for business
||Act on supporting the development of telecommunications networks and services – On May 7th 2010 Poland adopted a special legislative act (governmental initiative) which introduces regulations to allow effective roll-out of broadband networks in the country. One of the key elements of this law is regulations enabling right of way for contractors developing broadband networks.|
|67||Michal Pukaluk||Department of Telecommunications
Ministry of Administration and Digitization, Poland
|Govern. Org.||e-literacy||Digital Poland of Equal Opportunities – Lighthouse Keepers - Digital exclusion is still agreat problem in many countries of the world, as it undermines the development of the information society. Poland has taken many important steps aiming to combat digital exclusion. A project called ‘Digital Poland of Equal Opportunities (Polish abbreviation PCRS)’ is the best example of such action. Under the PCRS there is an initiative, coordinated by the „Cities on the Internet” Association (COI), which engages over 2700 Lighthouse Keepers of Digital Poland (LKDP). As many as 200 of them are tasked with local action plans. Since the project started, the LKDPs have conducted over 14000 meetings grouping together more than 110 thousand people all over the country.|
|68||Michal Pukaluk||Department of Telecommunications
Ministry of Administration and Digitization, Poland
|Govern. Org.||Principles of Multi-Stakeholder Cooperation -- Citizen participation – PL case study
||The Polish government believes that the Internet should remain free and open around the world. If any changes to the way global Internet is governed are necessary, they should be a result of transparent and democratic consultations with the community of its users. We believe that everyone has the right to know and understand how the Internet works. Regulations governing the Internet should be clear and the process of developing them should be fully transparent.|
|69||Linda van Rennssen||Bundesverband IT-Mittelstand (BITMi)||Business||How to maximize the digital sector’s contribution to Europe’s economy, the role of digital SMEs in Europe/ Regaining digital sovereignty in Europe --
- Europe & digital competitiveness
- The role of digital SMEs in Europe’s economy, challenges and opportunities
- Barriers and opportunities for the internationalisation of digital SMEs in Europe
|Digital SMEs have a key role to play in securing long-term, sustainable economic growth in Europe. Yet Europe’s IT-SMEs often remain small, vulnerable to international competition and represent only a tiny portion of international trade. Rather than establishing large state-funded IT/internet projects, as various politicians have suggested in reaction to US intelligence surveillance, we need to find ways of maximizing the competitiveness of European digital companies, particularly SMEs, whilst maintaining an open Internet. SMEs are the backbone of the European economy, crucial for jobs and drivers of innovation. A range of challenges and opportunities could be discussed in this context, with a particular focus on the internationalisation of SMEs and access to (emerging) markets.|
|70||Sebastian Haselbeck||Internet & Society Collaboratory e.V.||others||Multi-stakeholder approaches to enabling dialogue on internet policy on all levels -- How can we employ the multi-stakeholder approach beyond international contexts to enable creative solutions for Internet policy challenges on national and regional levels?||Multi-stakeholderism enables heterogeneous groups with different positions to find ways of governance. It is a proven concept for avoiding blind spots and increasing legitimacy by reaching higher levels of inclusion not yet broadly adopted outside the IGF context. On national levels processes are often driven behind walled gardens in traditional governmental fashion due to lack of knowledge or habit. There are platforms for internet and society related challenges, and experiments with formats, that can be discussed as opportunities for enabling constructive ideation environments, discourse culture and collaboration. How can stalemates in policy making be overcome? What are models of stakeholder inclusion and balance? How can innovative governance of socio-political dynamics look like?|
|71||Farzaneh Badiei||Hamburg University, Germany||Academia||Setting out the principles of the rule of law for Internet governance -- What are the rule of law principles in Internet governance? What are the mechanisms by which the rule of law can be protected?||Article 1 of the Council of Europe’s Internet Governance Principles reaffirms that the Internet governance arrangements should ensure the protection of the rule of law. One critical method for achieving this goal may be the use of online dispute resolution (ODR). ODR provides a protective mechanism for the rule of law, as well as a punitive mechanism in case its principles are breached. This proposal discusses the issues regarding structural aspects of ODR, how ODR can use the multi-stakeholder approach to ensure justice, and how effectively it can ensure that the principles of the rule of law are followed.|
|72||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||Transparency in Internet governance||How far should state and non-state actors be transparent in their activities and decision-making with regard to (mass electronic surveillance on) the Internet?|
|73||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||Cross-border interference with the Internet -- Cross-border interference with the infrastructure of the Internet (traffic routing e.g.), and the content.||Cross-border interference with parts of the infrastructure of the Internet, specifically with the traffic routing, and at the interface between the network and the content, that affects Internet users’ ability to access or provide content and services. The concern is not just with accidents or security incidents, but with actions to block, filter, divert or intercept content in one Member State, that may impact on users who are based in another Member State. This may result in cross-border (human rights) implications for access to content and information carried by that traffic. see: http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/media/CDMSI/CDMSI(2013)misc20_en.pdf|
|74||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||Hacking for Internet freedom||Self-explaining ;-)|
|75||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||The multi-stakeholder dimensions and added value in the fight against cybercrime|
|76||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||Protecting the Internet from harm – Global Internet Cooperation and Governance Mechanisms|
|77||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||Rewiring democracy – making Internet an enabler for free speech, assembly and association||See:
|78||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||Creative commons – a sustainable approach to sharing information and ideas, making ownership the exception||…by providing sharing, re-mixing or other creative forms under a set of different licenses.|
|79||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||How to respond to hate speech online?||How to respond to hate speech online (prevention, reporting systems, legal measures...) See: http://www.nohatespeechmovement.org/|
|80||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||How to educate Internet users about their rights and how to effectively associate them to Internet governance?|
|81||Lee Hibbard||Council of Europe||Europ. Org.||Mass surveillance and the right to privacy : how can our human rights be enforced and reinforced?|
|82||Thorsten Benner||GPPi||Academia||Brazil and Germany/Europe: Joint Leadership for an Open, Free and Secure Internet?||Can Brazil and Germany/Europe bring together a coalition for an open, free and secure internet that Charts middle ground between US and the "Information sovereignty" repressive regimes. The session would build on the results of a multi-stakeholder Brazilian-German Workshop in Sao Paulo in February 2014 organized by ITS, FGV and GPPi (with participation of Humboldt Institute). It would also reflect on results of Sao Paulo 23/24 April summit.|
|83||Plamena Popova||UniBIT, Bulgaria||Academia||Re-use of public sector information in EU -- Directive 2013/37/EU of the EU Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 amending Directive 2003/98/EC on the re-use of public sector information (PSI Directive) - Open Data||-Policies of EU Member States on the re-use of public sector information/Implementation of PSI Directive
-Choice/Use of Licenses (CC0, CCby etc)
-Open Data - trends and issues
-Access to public sector information/open data
|84||Gierow Hauke||Reporters Without Borders, Germany||Civil society||Rebuilding the Net -- How can net neutrality be achieved in Europe, and what should be done internationally? Which solutions have been presented to curb surveillance of journalists worldwide, one year after Snowden?||The Internet empowers people to report news and connect with each other. However, surveillance of journalists as well as censorship have become a mundane threat to press freedom. States are claiming more power to shape the way the Internet works. But challenges to press freedom online arise not only through of state actors. ISPs, as well as content and social-media platforms emerge as new gatekeepers. For Media to fulfil their role as \'fourth estate\', it is crucial to have a neutral and reliable infrastructure that operates at foreseeable costs. Infrastructure shall be regarded neutral if it acts as a „common carrier“ and censorship is forbidden.
Specific regulatory proposals shall be presented to the incoming EU Commission and Parliament.
|85||Christian Horchert||CCC e.V., Germany||Technical community||Securing civil society -- How can we get rid of insecurities by design which leave us vulnerable to attacks of all types? And what does it actually mean, if we are not able to fix the technical problems in the future?||The base of our society depends on complex, networked technical systems - be it for communication in general, be it related to economy, politics or much of our everyday’s life. From the perspective of civil society we can\'t distinguish between attacks from organized crime, intelligence agencies, armies or scriptkiddies, so we need at least to agree on the fact that we have an issue here, especially if the continue to let backdoors and insecurities on purpose stay the way they do right now. There is hope, but only if we agree what is necessary to protect infrastructure, i.e. by having better liabilities for soft- and hardware as well as data and a massive intervention to actually fix many of the current problems. In order to get this done there must be a technical as well as a legal effort.|
|86||Andreas Schumann||Genossenschaft zur Wahrung von Nutzerinteressen eG, Germany||Business||Use of personal data - balance of power between citizens, industry and government -- Personal data is the currency of the digital age. We suggest to discuss, what new applications, communities, mechanism ensure a fair balance of interests between all those involved.||Enlightened dialogue marketers and address wholesalers, economy and government understand that their business cannot go on as it has in the past: social and political pressure is growing to help consumers more easily exercise their right to determine how their personal data is used. Web 2.0 and social media demonstrate how users play a role in determining the nature of business relationships. What new mechanisms and applications for controlling personal data, one that brings together the interests of the advertising industry, businesses and government needing to advertise, with those of customers, consumers and citizens. How can the real “me” decides which data may be stored and who is permitted to use it; in turn, companies obtain non-discriminatory access to valid data.|
|87||Lorena Jaume-Palasi||Ludwig Maximilians Univ. // Collaboratory, Germany||Academia||Anonymity -- Is there a difference between anonymity online and anonymity offline? What are the new phenomena, characteristics, risks and cutting points of anonymity offline and online?||The once current dichotomy online / offline is incrementally eroding. Face recognition software and new gadgets (such as cameras, google glasses, etc.) in the public sphere constitute new challenges for anonymity. Democracies grant anonymity in some contexts to foster freedom of expression and choice. There are also cultural and social norms/expectations with respect to the need and validity of anonymity. Are we facing a new paradigm?|
|88||Hans Peter Dittler||Internet Society German Chapter||Technical community||Freedom on the Internet -- Regulation of the Internet,
Privacy of data on the Internet. The conflict between regulation and freedom.
|In order to maintain and develop the Internet as a free and open infrastructure, the following topics should be discussed:
- how much regulation is needed to keep the Internet as a resource free and available to everybody?
- how much regulation can a free Internet stand before it breaks?
- should the standards (like the ones from the IETF) which define the rules of the Internet be changed to ensure privacy?
- how much traffic engineering and data inspection is needed to keep the Internet technically working?
|89||Jiannis Koudounas||Internet & Society Collaboratory, Germany||others||Territorial rights, content ownership (and Big Data) in the Digital Age||1) Territorial rights (distribution, copyright) and content ownership in the Digital Age. 2) Big Data related (cultural and business) opportunities/risks for digital publishing and reading.
1) Territorial rights. How should the delivery/distribution of content be organized so that consumers can legally get what, when and where they want it?
2) Ownership of digital content. In the digital age, you no longer really seem to own the content you have "bought". Ownership is rather access to the "purchased" digital content. Yet access and availability are subject to territorial rights and complicated content provider licensing restrictions.
3) How publishers and cultural scientists can benefit from Big Data. "Hacking the book": tools to make texts (artificially) intelligent. Private vs. social reading. Who should own user generated content, such as annotations/comments in books?
|90||Enrico Gerstmann||Youth||How far should media savvy be an issue in education / schools?||Young people often don't know the consequences using the Internet. For example they upload pictures of themselves, but also of friends and even of strangers or celebrities. Problems with the law could have serious results of that behaviour. What should also be mentioned is the necessity of data protection. Youth can't imagine how much information of behaviour is actually saved.|
|91||Nadine Karbach||IJAB e.V. & Youth IGF Germany||Youth||Issue of Privacy vs. Democracy / eParticipation for young people
Tags: Freedom of expression, digital participation, democracy, empowerment, privacy
|Young people hear they shall be careful about the messages they post online, as it remains on the net forever. At the same time young people are asked to participate and voice their ideas to contribute to public opinion and digital participation. This difficult balance has been put on the table rarely and has been voiced hesitantly, yet puts a relevant and upcoming issue in the center.
Q: The proposal aims to identify and explore whether young people see the same dilemma and how they cope with it
Q: Perceptions and the role of anonymity/pseudonymity could be mapped and discussed.
|92||Nadine Karbach||Youth IGF Germany||Youth||Are terms and conditions of a social service / online service the new form of dictatorship online?
Tags: privacy, surveillance, freedom of expression
|Everyone is online and uses any service, like email or a social network. Every user agrees to the terms and conditions of that service. Admittedly, no one really reads this, yet everyone has to agree to it. What does that mean in the light of power, surveillance, autonomy, privacy? How to respond to it as user? Is privacy online dying? To illustrate, see the trailer below: "Terms and conditions may apply"
|93||Nigel Hickson||ICANN||Intern. Org||"ICANN's Role in the evolving Internet Governance Ecosystem" --||2013 has, and 2014 is likely to, witness some important and potentially far-reaching developments on the Internet Governance landscape; from privacy and cybersecurity to the changing nature of the DNS as the TLD space expands. This couples with ample opportunity for debate and discussion, whether in Brazil; Dubai (for the WTDC); London for ICANN; Berlin for EuroDig or Busan (for the PP-14) on these issues as well as the fundamental nature of Internet Governance in a changing world. There will be no blueprint or pat solution to read out in Berlin but, given the audience, an informative and lively discussion should be guaranteed".|
|94||Mathias Schindler||Wikimedia Germany||Civil society||Government Works / Open Government Data
1) Legal foundation of the copyright status of government works
2) Legal mechanisms for the access to government works
|Despite international and regional efforts to elevate the level of access to Government information, the situation as of 2013 is still far from satisfactory. Implementation requirements of the 2013 EU Public Sector Information Directive will provide an opportunity to both strengthen the right to re-use Government Information as well as to start a conversation to the justification of copyright protection for government works as such.|
|95||Desiree Miloshevic / Jim Killock||GDP / Openrights group, UK||Civil society||UK censorship (filtering especially, also copyright)|