<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hello all,<br>
<br>
You have all expressed interest in being among the founding members
of a new multi-stakeholder IGF dynamic coalition on Trade and the
Internet. I'm writing to you about the next steps towards its
formation.<br>
<br>
We are required to produce:<br>
<ol>
<li><b>The need for the dynamic coalition</b> - see below.<br>
</li>
<li><b>An action plan</b> - see below.<br>
</li>
<li><b>A mailing list</b> - this is the first message to it (cc'd
to you individually, so that if it went into your spam, you can
adjust your filter settings).<br>
</li>
<li><b>The contact person(s)</b> - for now, this is me.<br>
</li>
<li><b>A list of representatives from at least three stakeholder
groups</b> - Giacomo Mazzone from the European Broadcasting
Union has offered to represent the private sector, David Snead
from the Internet Infrastructure Coalition to represent the
Internet technical community, and we have several including
myself for civil society.<br>
</li>
<li>(Recommended) <b>A blog or website</b> - this is at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://opendigital.trade/projects/dc-trade">https://opendigital.trade/projects/dc-trade</a>, although it has no
content yet. If you haven't already registered here (I think
this only applies to Giacomo), please do so.<br>
</li>
</ol>
I suggest the following text to express "the need for the dynamic
coalition":<br>
<blockquote>Many Internet governance issues that are discussed at
the IGF are also the subject of rulemaking through bilateral,
plurilateral and multilateral trade agreements. The purpose of
this Dynamic Coalition is to provide an interface for the exchange
of information and best practices between the negotiators of these
trade agreements and the bodies in which they work, and the
Internet Governance Forum and its multi-stakeholder community.
This information exchange will be both substantive (that is,
concerning particular Internet public policy issues) and also
procedural (that is, about how Internet public policy can be
developed in a transparent and inclusive way).<br>
</blockquote>
And here is what I suggest (a little more tentatively) for an
initial action plan for 2017. These items are based around the
existing work of the Open Digital Trade Network (which most of you
are already part of):<br>
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>To publish a background paper mapping 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.<br>
</li>
<li>To develop a multi-stakeholder consensus around a set of
recommendations for the improvement of the transparency and
inclusiveness of the practice of international trade
negotiations and domestic consultation processes.</li>
<li>To build a network of representatives from trade
institutions and delegations for liaison with our Dynamic
Coalition and the broader IGF community.<br>
</li>
<li>To hold our inaugural meeting at the 2017 IGF in Geneva to
present our outputs to the IGF community.<br>
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
I am seeking your feedback. Can you please respond with your
thoughts about the above proposals by <b>17 February</b>?<br>
<br>
Many thanks.<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://eff.org">https://eff.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org">jmalcolm@eff.org</a>
Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
Public key: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt">https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt</a>
PGP fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF 1122</pre>
</body>
</html>