Development and Governance of the InternetWhere we came from and where we are going to? Challenges and Opportunities BHN APT Seminar Jan 28, 2013 Izumi Aizu email@example.com
Suggestions Think hard! Make your own memo Prepare comments & questions Don’t hesitate to ask questions or make comments any time 2
3D Printer, Laser cutter “FabLab movement suggests the new direction of the Information Society as a whole” Prof. Shumpei KumonMay 22 2010 3
Telecom or Internet? Telecom Internet YouTube Network Services Facebook Twitter Mobile/wireless Services Amazon Blog Fixed Line Skype Services www Email Internet TelephonyMay 22 2010 4
Four Questions1.Why did you get involved with Telecom/Communication?2.What is your professional goal? 5
Telecom or Internet 3. Which one do you think is more important, Telecom network or Internet services? And why do you think so?May 22 2010 6
Internet Governance 4. Have you heard the term "Internet Governance"? If so, what is your understanding of Internet Governance? What is the problem?May 22 2010 7
Wahyu Winarto, IndonesiaWhy did you get involved with Telecom/Communication?Because I got scholarship from PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia(incumbent telecommunication company in my country) in1992, then I started to join PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia since 1997.What is your professional goal?I want to be a Professional HR Practitioner, specially inTelecommunication industries.Which one do you think is more important, Telecom network orInternet services? And why do you think so?In my opinion, at this time, internet services become very muchimportant because of emergent of digital economy, but digitaleconomy can only has significant contribution to GDP if there aresufficient telecom network.Have you heard the term "Internet Governance"? If so, what is yourunderstanding of Internet Governance? What is the problem?No, I havent, but in my perception, its related to how to govern theinternet. In Indonesia we have such law. Its Law of ElectronicInformation & Transaction. 8
O.Babakulov, UzbekstanWhy did you get Telecommunications / Communications?Because, I have grown fond of technology. And then, the moderntrends in the global market, there is innovation in the field ofinformation and communication technologies, and their effectiveuse in more efficient management and technological processes inenterprises, the creation of new and expansion of existing marketsfor goods and services in different areas. Telecommunicationservices are increasingly intertwined with the concept of the Internetand its availability promotes more intensive exchange of informationand knowledge between people, leading to a society based onknowledge. Consequently, the development of telecommunicationsservices, including the Internet contributes to higher livingstandards.Which one do you think is more important, Telecom network orInternet services?Why do you think so?Because the telecommunications and Internet related to many.Internet - without telecommunication networks represent is difficult.I think so.
Aminur Rahman, BangladeshWhy did you get involved with Telecom/Communication?Now is the age of Telecom/ICT. ICT plays the key role in today’seconomy. No matter what industry people are in, it’s unlikely that itis untouched by the advent of Telecom/ICT – which is mostly thepreserve of techies. Telecom/ ICT jobs can be very rewarding. Afterall, it’s the hot growth sector of the 21st century. Things arechanging constantly. Technology is ever improving. Businessmodels are rushing to keep pace with technologicaldevelopments, which sometimes can be highly disruptive. If this isthe kind of challenge that one enjoys and the kind of environmentthat he wants to thrive in, then he should consider a career inTelecom/ICT. Moreover, an EEE graduate dreams to innovate andserve in his own field. Considering the described matters I gotinvolved with Telecom/ICT.What is your professional goal?My professional goal is to be a resource personal in Telecom/ICTsector. Especially, I want to be a professional in themanagement/administration of ICT in a broader sense.
Aminur Rahman, Bangladesh, 23. Which one do you think is more important, Telecomnetwork or Internet services? And why do you think so?Now a days people talk which is more important, telecomnetwork or internet services? I say both of them areimportant.As telecom network is obviously necessary for enter intothe server to retrieve information, internet services arenecessary to make peoples’ life easier using those datacommunication. Internet services have no meaning ifthere is no network to use those services. On thecontrary, telecom network has no uses if there is nointernet services. Now people do not want to talkonly, they like to use online services using telecomnetwork and internet services. In some extent, servicesare more desirable to people rather they bother whatnetwork they are using.
Aminur Rahman, Bangladesh, 34. Have you heard the term "Internet Governance”?If so, what is yourunderstanding of Internet Governance? What is the problem?Yes, I have heard the term “Internet Governance”. Internet governanceis the development and application of sharedprinciples, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programsthat shape the evolution and use of the Internet. This article describeshow the Internet was and is currently governed, some of thecontroversies that occurred along the way, and the ongoing debatesabout how the Internet should or should not be governed in the future.Internet governance should not be confused with E-Governance whichrefers to technology driven governance.The definition of Internet governance has been contested by differinggroups across political and ideological lines. One of the main debatesconcerns the authority and participation of certain actors, such asnational governments, corporate entities and civil society, to play arole in the Internets governance. A Working group established after aUnited Nations-initiated World Summit on the Information Society(WSIS) proposed the following definition of Internet governance as partof its June 2005 report:Internet governance is the development and application byGovernments, the private sector and civil society, in their respectiveroles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-makingprocedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of theInternet.
Gayan Munasinghe, Sri Lanka1. Electronic and telecommunication was my favoritesubject/topic from my school life to date. Therefore Iselected Telecommunication sector as my carrier2. Updating my knowledge on new telecommunicationbased technologies to serve the society as possible asI can3. Telecommunication is the most important. It is theinfrastructure to deliver the internet services. There isno internet services at all when there is not a Network.4. I have heard little bit about internet governance. Itsays about the requirement of Common way ofcommunication among all the users in the globalintranet. 13
Vongketh Phitsarath, LaosWhy did you get involved with Telecom/Communication?I can face many new difference things, new opportunities & challenges, learningof new knowledge of technologies and can communicate with new peoples.What is your professional goal?To make a positive impact in the company though my expertise and ethics. I alsolook forward to develop myself in leadership areas and can leading my team tonew innovations and growthWhich one do you think is more important, Telecom network or Internetservices? And why do you think so?Internet service is more importance. It’s the greatest development in the domainof communication industry while it functions as a valuable resource ofinformation. To communicate with unlimited people in the same time. A widevariety of entertainment including video games, music, movies, chat room, newsand others can be accessed through the Internet. Business transactions thatentails transmission of data from one corner of the world to another such as e-commerce. To community by discussions, express their views and gathervaluable knowledge. Beside that it’s more comfortable such as A variety ofservices are offered via Internet, for example job searching, onlinebanking, buying movie tickets, hotel reservations and consultation services etc.When you avail these services offline, they become more expensive.Have you heard the term “Internet Governance”? No, never
Anna Marie Fernando, The PhilippinesWhy did you get involved with Telecom/Communication?I got involved in Telecom/Communication when:a) I worked for the Philippine National EconomicDevelopment Agency (the economic think tankgovernment branch of our country) andb) I worked for the Philippine Long DistanceTelecommunications Company (the dominant telco playerin the Philippines to date).I wanted to get involved in Telecom/Communicationbecause I think its a economic infrastructure for nationbuilding. As an enabler of a lot of possibilities, I thinkTelecom/Comms will also provide good learningopportunities for me.What is your professional goal?To have a successful career and find meaning in the work Ido.
Anna Marie Fernando, The Phillipines, 2Which one do you think is more important, Telecomnetwork or Internet services? And why do you think so?Both since I think lines between Telecom and Internet isblurring as the ICT sector evolves.Have you heard the term "Internet Governance"? Ifso, what is your understanding of Internet Governance?What is the problem?Yes, in my reading for the BHN CyberLaw Subject. In myunderstanding, Internet Governance is about establishingstandards and regulations that would promote usagewhile serving the interest of the consumers. However, Ithink theres a huge debate on this one because itsdifficult to strike a balance between the 2 (e.g. internetregulation on internet libel vs. right to freedom ofspeech, etc.)
In the beginning… Few people believed that ordinary people will use computers Very few people believed that people will use computers to communicate In the Telecom world…Internet was regarded as “dirty”, “not secure”, not suited to serious business Governments, Telco, ITU, Business, Acad emia - all main stream people were against the Internet 17
IntroductionThe user is the center PC enabled people to control computers “Counter-culture” from West Coast “Hackers”, Steven Levy” “Tools for Thought”, Howard Rheingold Linking computers made users more powerful “Virtual Community”, H. Rheingold Internet empowering people & society Free communication, action, inter-action “Smart Mobs”, H. Rheingold
ITR at WCIT/ITU, just finished• ITR: International Telecommunications Regulation an International Treaty, revised since 1988 version• WCIT: World Conference on International Telecommunication, held in Dubai, Dec 2012
New global telecoms treaty agreed in Dubai World Conference on International Telecommunications forges solid new framework for tomorrow’s hyper-connected world News Release by ITU Dubai, 14 December, 2012 – After two intensive weeks of negotiations, delegates from around the world have agreed a new global treaty that will help pave the way to a hyper- connected world that will bring the power of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to people everywhere. Over 2,000 delegates were registered for the conference, which was held by ITU at the request of its 193 Member States to renegotiate the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs), the binding global treaty facilitating global interconnection and interoperability of information and communication services, their efficient operation and their widespread public availability. The treaty sets out general principles for ensuring the free flow of information around the world. New provisions in the text place special emphasis on future efforts to assist developing countries, on promoting accessibility to persons with disabilities, and on asserting all people‟s right to freedom of expression over ICT networks. Other pioneering new provisions include a Resolution to create a single, globally harmonized number for access to emergency services, new text mandating greater transparency in the prices set for mobile roaming, and new provisions to improve the energy efficiency of ICT networks and help combat e-waste. Tough issues that provoked considerable debate at the conference included network security, unsolicited bulk content such as spam email, the definition of entities providing services under the terms of the treaty, the principle of non-discriminatory access of countries to each other‟s networks, and whether or not to include language on freedom of expression in the Preamble text of the treaty.
A true success? Chairman Mohamed Nasser Al Ghanim (UAE) succeeded in breaking a seeming deadlock on Thursday, after discussions late into the night on Wednesday 12th failed to make headway on the few remaining sticking points. Coming back to the meeting on Thursday evening after a tense start to negotiations earlier that day, Mr Al Ghanim presented a new „consolidated package‟ containing all agreed compromise texts that had been negotiated painstakingly section by section over the past two weeks at Committee, Ad Hoc Group and informal group level. ITU Secretary-General Dr Hamadoun Touré called the signing of the treaty this afternoon a “momentous occasion and historic opportunity to bring connectivity to the two thirds of the world‟s people who are still offline.” Speaking to assembled delegates at the closing ceremony this afternoon, he said: “As you look back today on your very intensive, very long days of work, you can hold our heads up high – proud that you have triumphed over adversity and delivered the goods.” He added that he regretted that some countries have so far declined to ratify the treaty, and hoped ITU will continue to work constructively with those nations going forward.
Or a true failure? WCIT collapses: US, UK, allies refuse to sign treaty after Africa wins floor vote commsday.com The International Telecommunications Union and World Conference on International Telecommunications was in crisis as we went to press at 6am AEST, with the United States, the United Kingdom and several of their allies declaring that they would refuse to sign the proposed International Telecommunications Regulations. The crisis erupted last night when the African bloc attempted to have its preferred form of words over the rights of member states to access telecommunications networks accepted in the treaty. The US and other allies saw the language as an unambiguous attempt to open the ITRs up to governance and content regulation. Iran took the unprecedented step of calling for a vote, against the oft-stated intentions of the ITU to forge a consensus on the ITRs. The vote was won 77-33 by the African bloc with 6 abstentions. The US then immediately declared it would not sign the treaty. Ambassador Terry Kramer said “It‟s with a heavy heart and a sense of missed opportunities that the US must communicate that it‟s not able to sign the agreement in the current form.” “The Internet has given the world unimaginable economic and social benefit during these past 24 years. All without UN Regulation.” “We candidly cannot support an ITU Treaty that is inconsistent with the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. As the ITU has stated, this conference was never meant to focus on Internet issues. However, today, we‟re in a situation where we still have text and resolutions that cover issues on spam and also provisions on Internet governance … the United States continues to believe that Internet policy must be multi-stakeholder driven. Internet policy should not be determined by Member States, but by citizen, communities, and broader society. And such consultation from the private sector and civil society is paramount. This has not happened here.”
UK, Canada, Sweden, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and Denmark followed Then, UK head of delegation Simon Towle backed the US position. “My delegation came to work for revised ITRs. But not at any cost. We‟re not able to sign a bad agreement that does nobody any favors and makes nobody happy.” “We all agreed that content was not intended to be part of the ITRs, but content issues keep coming up. We preferred no text on security but in the interest of compromise we worked towards language we could accept. Unfortunately, the language that we proposed and the various alternatives we proposed were constantly rejected and the compromise that we have before us we could only possibly accept in the context of a treaty that was acceptable in all other respects. On the Internet itself, our position is clear. We do not see the ITRs as the place to address Internet issues. The proper place is multistakeholder fora, the IGF, the ICANN GAC.” Other countries including Canada, Sweden, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and Denmark also said they would not sign the treaty. Poland, Kenya, Costa Rica and New Zealand said they would need to consult their governments. Australia did not declare a position before the plenary was suspended. The WCIT chair immediately went into damage control, calling for a break and hoping to reconvene the event at 11.30pm Dubai time (6.30am AEST) but all signs were that the event had collapsed. Posted on: Friday, 14th December 2012 http://www.commsday.com/uncategorized/wcit-collapses-us-uk-allies-refuse-to-sign-treaty-after-africa-wins-floor-vote
Member States signed for ITRAFGHANISTAN ALGERIA AZERBAIJAN ANGOLA SAUDI ARABIA ARGENTINA BAHRAIN BANGLADESH BARBADOS BHUTAN BOTSWANA BRAZIL BELIZE BENIN BRUNEI BURKINA BURUNDI CAPE VERDE DARUSSALAM FASO CAMBODIA CENTRAL CHINA COMOROS REPUBLIC OF COTE DIVOIRE AFRICA CONGO CUBA DJIBOUTI DOMINICA EL SALVADOR EGYPT GABON GHANA GUATEMALA GUYANA HAITI IRAN INDONESIA IRAQ JAMAICA JORDAN KAZAKHSTAN KOREA KYRGYZSTAN KUWAIT LEBANON LESOTHO LIBERIA LIBYA LUCIA MALAYSIA MALI MAURICE MEXICO MOROCCO MOZAMBIQUE NAMIBIA NEPAL NIGER NIGERIA OMAN PANAMA PAPUA NEW PARAGUAY QATAR RUSSIAN RWANDA SENEGAL GUINEA FEDERATIONSIERRA LEONE SINGAPORE SOMALIA SOUTH AFRICA SOUTH SUDAN SRI LANKA SUDAN SWAZILAND TANZANIA THAILAND TOGO TUNISIATRINIDAD AND TURKEY UGANDA UKRAINE UNITED ARAB URUGUAY TOBAGO EMIRATESUZBEKISTAN YEMEN VENEZUELA VIET NAM ZIMBABWE www.itu.int/osg/wcit-12/highlights/signatories.html
States not signed for ITR ALBANIA ANDORRA ARMENIA AUSTRALIA AUSTRIA BELARUS BELGIUM COLOMVIA BULGARIA COSTA RICA CANADA CHILE CZECH CROATIA CYPRUS DENMARK ESTONIA FINLAND REPUBLIC FRANCE GAMBIA GEORGIA GERMANY GREECE HUNGARY INDIA IRELAND ISRAEL ITALY JAPAN KENYA LATVIA LIECHTENSTEIN LITHUANIA LUXEMBOURG MALAWI MALTA MARSHALL MOLDOVA MONGOLIA MONTENEGRO NORWAY NETHERLANDS ISLANDSNEW ZEALAND PERU PHILIPPINES POLAND PORTUGAL SERBIA UNITED SLOVAKIA SLOVENIA SPAIN SWEDEN SWITZERLAND KINGDOMUNITED STATES OF AMERICA
It all began with the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Summit: United Nation’s high-level event with Head of States to discuss matters of mutual concerns, mostly global emerging issues WSIS – proposed by ITU, adopted by GA 1st phase 2003 - in Geneva, 2nd 2005 in Tunis Objective: Close the digital divide in developing countries Take advantage of digital economy for further development Address new issues of information society
“Internet Governance” became the hottest issue Emerged during prep process in 2002, the hottest of all issues Developing countries wanted to change the international system around ICANN “Internet is a global public resource that requires governments to manage”, calling for formal intervention of governments in the management of the Domain Name System, under the UN System by international intergovernmental body “Replace ICANN with ITU”, “UN to take over ICANN” USA and many Western countries argued for “No regulation” by governments, let private sector to manage Internet resources Long and winding debate continued among governments as well as business and civil society participants in the preparatory process
What is “Internet Governance”?1. Governance of Internet infrastructure Domain Name System, IP number allocation Standardization process (IETF vs. ITU etc.) Access – to close digital divide2. Governance of Social activities over Internet Illegal & harmful content (for minors) Spam, cyber security3. Governance of Information Society E-commerce, digital economy Digital culture Social inclusion – no one should be left behind 2013/2/3 31
Working Definition of Internet Governance:“Internet governance is the development and application by Governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet.” from the WGIG Report 32
Why it became so hot? Facing new challenges with changing realities From research network to global Public & Economic infrastructure Uneven framework with USG holds discretionary power Historical legacy became political concern Inadequate current systems “North” dominates the “South” – less participation in ICANN process from developing countries – appeal made by G8 DOT Force with no result From governments to civil society Lack of proper understanding about Internet and ICANN (history, role and functions) Distrust created by politically motivated actors ITU to regain control over “telecom” “Politics” inside UN system Internet empowers the users/individuals/citizens
Politics behindAnti-US, anti globalization against US dominance in military, technology & economy Demonstration against WEF, IMF, WTO, G8 Summit…US invasion to Iraq after 911Competition for world hegemony for digital economy
Working Group on InternetGovernance (WGIG) – 2004-05 Outcome of WSIS negotiation on IG 40 members, from South and North, governments, civil society and private sector Open and closed meetings Sep 04, Nov 04, Feb, Apr, Jun & July 05 Online consultations Contributions, questionnaire and forum Webcast and real-time captures
2006～ Internet Governance Forum （IGF）A “Product” of WSIS Multi-stakeholder set-up Gov, Biz, Civil Society – on equal footing MAG（appointed by SG) 5-year mandate, with scheduled reviewGreece, Brazil, India, Egypt, Lith uania, Kenya, AzerbaijanIndonesia (2013) http://www.intgovforum.org//
IGF Improvement after 5 yearsUN GA agreed to continue IGF for another 5 years with improvementsEcoSoc, CSTD - formed WG to make report on IGF Improvement in 2011 (after negotiation) CSTD WG Report finalized in Mar 2012 Adopted at CSTD, May 2012 Improve Outcome Shaping, Outreach, Support Developing countries‟ participation No major change in nature and structure of IGF Just adopted at UN GA, Dec 16?
Conventional regulatory framework (at ITU) Governments to regulate; business and technologist participate and form international organization (ITU) Civil Society/individual users have no role Inter-national, but not Global Governments Int’l Orgs Industry Civil Society Technologist 2013/2/3 WSIS - Politics of Internet 38 Management
Internet governance old model： private sector self management （IETF, ICANN, W3C, Unicode Consortium) Self-management led by technologists Engineers, pioneers form “private club” to manage Looks global, but lacks legal and political legitimacy Not scalable, little civil society involvement Self- management Technologists New industryTraditional Civil Society industry Int’l Governments Orgs 2013/2/3 WSIS - Politics of Internet 39 Management
New Model: Multi-stakeholder governance Net governance cannot exclude users Not “consumers” or “mass”, but Netizens who have power All stakeholders to get involved with proper balance Minimize government involvement, support participation from civil society and developing countries Multi-stakeholder Governance Industry Technologists Civil Society (Netizens) Int’l Orgs Government 2013/2/3 40
My Commitment to Internet Governance ’80s – promoting PC Networking ’90s – promoting the Internet Principle People to People Communication is the base For the better society User centric perspective Practice ’96 organized “Netizen Forum” – mailing list discussion, TV live debate Promoting Internet in Asia ’97-2000 ARN in Malaysia ’98 – SG for APIA, participated in IFWP Bring voices from Asia, users and citizens into ICANN formation process （MAC、AtLarge) ’99 – promoted Global Internet Y2K Campaign ’00 – participated in G8 DoT Force representing NPOs from Japan ’03-05 participated in WSIS, from Civil Society ’04 - IGTF WGIG process Network Security, IPv4 depletion, NGN issues 41
Early history of Computer Networking Internet was not the only gameARPANET 1969 ARPA, US DoD JC LickriderCom 1970s Uppsala U. /Stockholm U. Jacob PalmeCommunity Memory 1972 Berkrey, US Mark SzpakowskiUUCP 1977 Bell LabCBBS 1978 Generated many “hobbyists” Christensen/SuessUseNet 1979 U. North Carolina/Duke U. Source of “Netizen”Electronic InformationExchange System (EIES) 1979 Computer Conferencing, NJIT Murray TuroffThe Source 1979 Online UtilityCompuServe 1980 ForumTCP/IP 1982 CNRI Vint Cerf/ Bob KhanConfer U Michigan/MTS Bob ParnesCoSy 1983 U. of Guelph, Canada Alastair MayerFidonet 1983 Linking BBS globally Jenkins?Well 1985 Whole Earth Review S. Barnd etcBITNET 1981 City U. of NY / Yale U. I. Fuchs / G. FreemanWorld-wide Web 1980-90 CERN Tim Berners-LeeMosaic 1993 NCSA Marc Andreesen May 22, 10 43
Some Pioneers Vannever Bush: “As you may think” Douglas Engelbart: ARC, NLS, Mouse, Word Processor, Computer Conference J.C.R. Licklider/ Robert Taylor: “Computers for communications” Vint Cerf/Robert Kahn/Dave Farber/Larry Landwieber/Jun Murai/Kilnam Chon/Jon Postel/Steve & Dave Clocker/Daniel Karrenburg – Built 1st Internet Rick Adams- UUNet – 1st Commercial ISP Frank Burns/Lisa Kimball/Jeff Shapard/Joi Ito – MetaNet/ENA (Electronic Networking Association) May 22, 10 44
Internet became the main stream “Information Super Highway” Al Gore Presidential campaign1992 INET92 in Japan National Information Infrastructure (NII)1993 UN online Global Information Infrastructure (GII) APII/KII, proposed by President Kim of Korea at APEC1994 Mosaic/Netscape, Yahoo Japanese PM office, US Whitehouse online NSF backbone quietly retired, Commercial Internet to bloom1995 NRI, Iran’s first ISP online Amazon.com, eBay, Vatican, Canadian Gov online “Internet Boom” in Japan, NTT:OCN started1996 E*Trade IPO1997 Clinton “E-Commerce” strategy1998 ICANN est.
“ICT for Development”1991- Networking Training Workshop at INET etc,1992 Sustainable Development Network Program (SDNP), by UNDP as outcome of Earth Summit1993 Asia Pacific Networking Group (APNG) (APCIRN ’91)1995 “GII Summit” by G7, Brussels, EU: “Information Society”1995 PAN Asia Networking /IDRC Singapore Mongolia, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Sri-Lanka, China…1996 Information Society and Development, South Africa1996 Acacia, IDRC1996 Multimedia Super Corridor (Malaysia) SingaporeONE (Singapore)1997 APDIP by UNDP2000 Okinawa Summit, IT Charter, DoT Force2001 DoT Force Genoa Action Plan May 22, 10 Internet History & Governance 46
Global trend around “Information Society”1993 NII – Clinton/Gore1994 GII – Gore proposed at ITU Development Conf1995 G8 Information Society Summit Japan – promoted “Advanced Info Society”1996 MSC/Singapore One spread to Asia1997-98 IFWP – ICANN Governance became the issue1999 Y2K, Dot Com boom2000 G8 Okinawa Summit – “New Economy” recognized Digital Divide - DoT Force、“e-Europe”2003 WSIS Geneva2004 WGIG2005 WSIS Tunis2006 Internet Governance Forum （IGF）started 47
My encounter to Internet (1)1985 Asked Jun Murai to talk about “Academic Network” in a study group meeting1986 Established Institute for Networking Design, promoting PC Networking1987 Organized Networking Forum in Tokyo and Oita1988 Jun Murai presented in Networking Forum in Sendai1990 Found the strange use of EmailJeff Shapard of TWICS introduced the Internet at ENA Symposium, but I could not understand it well. He criticized Japanese networkers as living in “Denshi Shimaguni” 48
My encounter to Internet (2) 1992 Contributed an article to Global Networks from MIT Press, used Mailing List among authors INET92 in Kobe, NTT rejected Internet, Clinton/Gore won the campaign, GLOCOM connected to Internet via 192K 接続 IIJ est. 1993 Clinton/Gore started, “NII” announced over the Net, NTT request to explain Internet, IHNS est. MIC connected to Internet, GLOCOM Web started, wrote to Nikkei Keizai Kyoshitsu, INET San Francisco, visited Mike Nelson at White House, GLOCOM faced crisis, NTT shift to Multimedia, gave presentation to Japan Inc, no good understanding 1994 Gore announced “GII”, Executives visited White House, IIJ got license, ODN presentation Multi Media Joint Trial (Oita) APNG Beijing Conf, 「進化するネットワーク」 published 1995 Kobe Great earthquake, NTT Break-up debate InfoCom Policy SG proposals 1996 Netizen Forum, Live TV Debate NTT “Brake-up” report GLOCOM Forum, NTT started OCN 2nd visit to White House, Multi- media Asia in Malaysia with MSC 49
How global are we?From Nepal to Cairo to Jerusalem, to Kuala Lumpur... Internet History & Governance 50
Evangelizing the Internet in JapanPromoting the PC Networking (Pasokon Tsushin) since 1986Shift from PC Networking to Internet, 1992 Stand-alone to network of networks Local to Global, Closed to Open, Physical to LogicalUS – going ahead with “digital” industry Japan is getting behind – most people did not take this seriously – until 1995Spoke with “Japan Inc.” Toyota, DDI, NEC, Hitachi, JAL, Ajinomoto, Seibu… 51
1992Jan-Apr - “Global Authoring Network” for the book “Global Networks” (Linda Harasim ed. MIT Press 1994)Apr? - Prof. Ishida came asked for participation to INET ’92Jun - 8 members of GLOCOM went to INET ’92 in Kobe real encounter with the Internet – many from Africa! GLOCOM decided to link Internet – 1/3 of annual budgetJul – proposed “Internet” to NTT, strongly rejectedNov – Bill Clinton elected as US President Watched the ballots counted in Cambridge w/ Mitch Kapor NY Times – “Now Japan’s Turn to Play Catch-up”Nov - GLOCOM linked to Internet with 192k leased line Using is believing, really! 52
US Government Involvement 97.7 “Global Framework on E- commerce” announced 98.2 Green Paper hearings & coordination – solicited global inputs 98.6 White Paper 98.9 Approve “newCo”? 98.11 Hand-over beginning 54
Lessons LearnedUsing is Believing – still validBe part of history, not outsideValue of human networkingJapan as closed society – hard to breakHistory repeats How to prevent same mistakes? 56
Thank youSee you online! Izumi Aizu <firstname.lastname@example.org>