NARALO Trip/Event Assessment 2

Post-Event Report:

Summary of IGFUSA2016 Highlights:

The Forum opened with a plenary on the digital divide with a presentation by a researcher from the Pew Research Center. The message here was that the divide was still alive and well and in some respects, growing. There was some good news regarding upticks in connectivity among the economically depressed and racial minorities due to the increase in smart phone usage. Efforts to connect third world populations have been falling short.

There were three morning breakout sessions.  I attended the one on trade transparency. There was an interesting discussion on confidentiality in trade negotiations, in particular in the context of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a recently negotiated multilateral trade treaty with intellectual property and Internet trade implications. Speakers questioned the need for the traditionally accepted policy requiring confidentiality during and following treaty negotiations, and suggested moving towards greater transparency in trade negotiations.

Of the three afternoon breakout sessions, I attended the session on the Big Data and the Internet of Things.  One of the speakers opined that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg as respects the Internet of Things and that the IoT will revolutionize our lives to the same extent as the Internet itself has. There were discussions regarding the need for safeguarding privacy and security, predictions how the IOT would impact bandwidth needs, and ethical questions regarding the generation of use of Big Data.

The afternoon plenary dealt with the IANA transfer to ICANN. This was clearly the Forum highlight and the presentations and debate can be relived at https://livestream.com/internetsociety/igfusa/videos/129759615 thanks to the hard work of our very own Joly MacFie.  The discussion was lead off by Larry Strickling, US Depart of Commerce, explaining that a further delay in the transition, which could result from the failure of the legislature to approve the transition plan supported by the administration, would be expected to cause the U.S. Government to lose credibility in the eyes of the other governments. This, in turn, would be expected to cause countries who favor a centralized control of the Internet through a UN agency or similar to gain traction in the Internet governance debate.  Speakers representing libertarian perspectives argued for delaying the transition to work out certain details which they viewed as potentially problematic, particularly in the area of ICANN corporate governance. One speaker argued for a claw-back provision that would allow the U.S. Government to rescind the transition during an initial two year period if certain risks or dangers came to pass or loomed.

In addition to Jolly, Judith Hellerstein and Glenn McKnight were instrumental in the success of the IFGUSA 2016.   The day was insightful and stimulating and packed a lot, efficiently, into a few hours. The small size of the audience (maybe 200 or so) added to the effectiveness of the event.

I would like to thank ICANN and NARALO for  giving me the opportunity to attend.

Outreach and Engagement:

I was successful in connecting with 3 or 4 individuals that expressed some interest in becoming an ALS.  One was a law student who was interning with the FCC for the summer and who had attended an IGF in  Istanbul in 2014.  She expressed some interest in participating in the At Large community and also thought she might have friends at her law school that might be interested.

I also connected with one of the speakers who is a non-practicing lawyer working for a research consultancy who had done extensive research on the ICANN transition.  We discussed the advantages of joining the At Large contingency relative to other ICANN contingencies.

I also met with other attendees who, because of their positions and interests, are unlikely to become ALSs.

The opportunities for outreach and engagement were somewhat more limited at this event, perhaps because it was held in Washington, DC with participants from government, think tanks and consultancies who would be unlikely to be appropriate ALSs or have an interest in constituting an ALS.

The proposed goals and outcome were, for the most part, realized.  Few but potentially important outreach contacts were made.  NARALO's presence at the IGF was tangible in part, I believe, because of Louis and my presence.  Our attendance at the meeting reinforced our relationship with NARALO and its leadership and other constituencies of the Internet community.  It also informed us about recent trends in Internet governance and put is in contact with those we would be unlikely to meet at ICANN events.