[DC-Trade] Welcome and an outline of the DC's work

Fri Mar 10 22:03:46 PST 2017

Thank you Jeremy for your work and the valuable documents and efforts in the kick start.
Giacomo
Ps: will you be in Copenhagen ?

De: Jeremy Malcolm
Envoyé: samedi, 11 mars 2017 00:58
À: dc-trade at opendigital.trade
Objet: [DC-Trade] Welcome and an outline of the DC's work

Welcome to all members of the Dynamic Coalition on Trade and the Internet.  Sorry for the slow start as we have been waiting for everyone who has expressed interest to join up.  Currently we have 21 members from three stakeholder groups, and we can get underway.

For those who missed it, in my last message to this list I set out the objectives and the preliminary action plan for this dynamic coalition, and its relationship to the Open Digital Trade Network out of which it grew.  That message is archived at https://opendigital.trade/pipermail/dc-trade/2017-February/000010.html.

This email will cover a few topics:

  1.  The mailing list and website
  2.  Some news updates
  3.  Work items:
     *   Background paper
     *   Building contacts with trade institutions and delegations
     *   Recommendations for improvements of transparency and openness

1. Mailing list and website

You can use this mailing list to post any news, questions, or proposals that you think will promote the agenda of the Dynamic Coalition which is to act as an interface for the exchange of information and best practices between the negotiators of Internet-related trade agreements and the bodies in which they work, and the Internet Governance Forum and its multi-stakeholder community.

The website is to be used for information that is intended to be less transitory, so that it builds up a permanent record.  There is a (currently empty) wiki<https://opendigital.trade/projects/dc-trade/wiki> there, a document repository<https://opendigital.trade/projects/dc-trade/documents>, a subscribable shared calendar<https://opendigital.trade/projects/dc-trade/issues/calendar>, and an issue tracker<https://opendigital.trade/projects/dc-trade/issues> which can be used to keep track of our work items.  My experience of the Open Digital Trade Network is that these might not be much used, but personally I have found them useful and you might too.  A video tutorial that I prepared for that network on how to use the platform is available<https://youtu.be/EguZsh0Po_Q>.

2. Some news updates

Although the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is no more, the Internet-related topics with which it dealt have been proposed for inclusion in at least two other current or forthcoming trade negotiations, which are a renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and Asia's Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).  Here is EFF's recent opinion article about this, which links to a public letter to trade negotiators warning them not to repeat the mistakes of the TPP:

  https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/will-tpp-live-nafta-and-rcep

Meanwhile at the World Trade Organisation (WTO), several delgations released papers on digital topics at this month's TRIPS Council meeting.  A WTO report of this meeting which links to those papers can be found here:

  https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news17_e/trip_01mar17_e.htm

Finally in United States news, the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) is holding a public hearing next month, and soliciting comments in advance of that hearing, about global digital trade, for purposes of a report that it is preparing for the United States Trade Representative (USTR).  The report will include, amongst other topics, an investigation of regulatory and policy measures that might impede digital trade, including:

  *   FDI and other market access restrictions;
  *   cross-border data flow limitations (data localization requirements, Internet blocking, censorship, cultural regulations of digital content, and data privacy protections);
  *   cybersecurity regulations and limitations on the choice of encryption technologies;
  *   ISP regulations, including limitations on ISPs intended to protect IPR; and
  *   rules determining liability for third-party content.

If anyone is interested in writing or collaborating upon a submission to this enquiry, I can supply more information.

3. Work items

Four initial work items for this dynamic coalition were suggested, one of which will be our inaugural meeting at the next IGF.  The other three are treated below.  As mentioned above, our website can be used to track work towards completion of these work items, which some of you may find helpful.

3.1. Background paper

This was originally described as a mapping exercise, but we finally settled on calling it a document describing the major trade agreements that are in place or under negotiation, as well as the venues where this takes place, and identifying the key Internet governance issues that are the subject of such agreements and negotiations.  It will be one of our major deliverables and will be a useful reference going forward.

EFF and members of the Open Digital Trade Network have already developed some documentation that can be used as a reference for developing the background paper.  These are:

  *   Background document for 2016 Strategy Meeting on Catalyzing Reform of Trade Negotiation Processes: https://www.eff.org/files/2016/02/02/background_document.pdf
  *   Notes and report from same 2016 meeting: https://www.eff.org/files/2016/03/15/meeting_report.pdf
  *   Background document for 2017 Trade Transparency Roundtable meeting: https://www.eff.org/files/2017/01/10/trade_for_the_digital_age_download.pdf

If anyone wishes to volunteer at this stage to help put together the background paper please let me know, otherwise I will make a start in due course and put it out for contributions and comment.

3.2. Building contacts with trade institutions and delegations

So far this dynamic coalition is, predictably, composed of civil society, private sector, and technical and academic community members.  Like most other dynamic coalitions, we are lacking in governmental participants.  Yet one of our aims is to build a network of representatives from trade institutions and delegations for liaison with our Dynamic Coalition and the broader IGF community.

Therefore if anyone has suggestions of members from government and trade institutions whom we could approach to become participants, or has ideas for our strategy in building such a network, please do share your suggestions.  Otherwise, we can begin to build out this network once we have developed some deliverables such as our background paper and recommendations.

3.3. Recommendations for improvements of transparency and openness

The dynamic coalition also aims to develop a multi-stakeholder approach to facilitating the transparency and inclusiveness in international trade negotiations and the domestic consultation processes.

On my part, I would like to think that this could involve working towards the development of a set of recommendations that can be endorsed by dynamic coalition members as best practices, and I would be interested to know whether other members agree on this approach.

The Open Digital Trade Network has already participated in the development of a set of recommendations for the improvement of transparency and participation at a domestic U.S. level.  These recommendations would need some modification if they were to be adapted for use in other countries and institutions, but I would like to kick the conversation off by setting them out here:

1. Publish U.S. textual proposals on rules in ongoing international trade negotiations

USTR should immediately make available on its website the textual proposals related to rules that it has already tabled to its negotiating partners in the context of the TTIP, TiSA, and any other bilateral, regional, or multilateral trade and investment negotiations it undertakes.

2. Publish consolidated texts after each round of ongoing negotiations

USTR should impose as a prerequisite to any new or continuing trade negotiations that all parties agree to publish consolidated draft texts on rules after each negotiating round, including negotiations conducted on the entire agreement or a specific element or chapter and among trade ministers or other officials of every party to such negotiations or of a subgroup of the parties to such negotiations.

3. Appoint a "transparency officer" who does not have structural conflicts of interest in promoting transparency at the agency

USTR should immediately appoint a transparency officer who does not have any structural conflicts of interest in promoting transparency at the agency.

4. Open up textual proposals to a notice and comment and public hearing process

USTR should initiate on-the-record public notice and comment and public hearing processes—at least equivalent to that normally required for other public rulemaking processes—at relevant points during the generation of government positions.

5. Make Trade Advisory Committees more broadly inclusive

If proposed U.S. texts and draft texts from negotiations are made publicly available, the main official advantage of the Trade Advisory Committee system – access to that information – would disappear. However, if Trade Advisory Committees are to be retained in addition to public notice and comment and public hearing processes, then resources must be devoted to making membership and effective participation in these committees more accessible to all affected stakeholder groups, including non-industry groups.
What are thoughts about working towards the development of some multi-stakeholder recommendations such as these as a dynamic coalition output?

--
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org<mailto:jmalcolm at eff.org>

Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161

:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF 1122
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway
**************************************************