http://giplatform.pbworks.com
“Mapping IG is a big mistake. The Internet is 
constantly changing and covers the whole 
world and its activities. The map will never 
be up to date and complete.” 
(Mapping) 
vs 
“We need mapping!”
“Diversity of actors engaged with IG” 
(Opening session) 
vs 
“Absence of business sector, except IT” 
(Mapping the IG landscape) 
Vs 
“Business wants to protect its present interests 
while IG is mostly looking towards the future” 
(Mapping)
“NETmundial initiative set new standards on 
how to shape the IG process” 
(Opening session) 
Vs 
“NETmundial initiative is a blank canvas on 
which solutions can be written” (Keynote) 
vs 
“It’s purely business: showbusiness” 
(Mapping the IG landscape)
“Human Rights: The double-edged sword: 
political, economic, and social life are 
increasingly reliant on platforms such as 
the Internet yet these platforms are not 
only subject and vulnerable to mass 
surveillance, but it is their very existence 
that facilitates this surveillance” 
(Policy angles)
“ICANN is a monopoly and like every monopoly 
it has a dominant position and abuses it” 
(Mapping) 
vs 
“ICANN collaborates very closely with many 
different countries and other stakeholders” 
(Keynote)
“Remote participation inclusive2 
vs 
“Not enough just to be in the room: how can 
remote participants be involved in 
decisions made during a coffee break” 
(Inclusion)
NOT: Actors, processes, and issues 
BUT: Issues, actors, and action spaces
“A common language that is understandable 
to Human Right experts, IT developers, 
and business entrepreneurs is 
necessary” 
(Policy angles)
• To map or not to map? 
• How do we engage the business sector at ALL 
levels? 
• NETmundial – showbusiness vs new paradigm? 
• Human rights – the double-edged sword, ways 
forward? 
• ICANN – monopoly vs model of diversity?

Summary presentation for the GIC Day One

  • 1.
  • 3.
    “Mapping IG isa big mistake. The Internet is constantly changing and covers the whole world and its activities. The map will never be up to date and complete.” (Mapping) vs “We need mapping!”
  • 4.
    “Diversity of actorsengaged with IG” (Opening session) vs “Absence of business sector, except IT” (Mapping the IG landscape) Vs “Business wants to protect its present interests while IG is mostly looking towards the future” (Mapping)
  • 6.
    “NETmundial initiative setnew standards on how to shape the IG process” (Opening session) Vs “NETmundial initiative is a blank canvas on which solutions can be written” (Keynote) vs “It’s purely business: showbusiness” (Mapping the IG landscape)
  • 7.
    “Human Rights: Thedouble-edged sword: political, economic, and social life are increasingly reliant on platforms such as the Internet yet these platforms are not only subject and vulnerable to mass surveillance, but it is their very existence that facilitates this surveillance” (Policy angles)
  • 8.
    “ICANN is amonopoly and like every monopoly it has a dominant position and abuses it” (Mapping) vs “ICANN collaborates very closely with many different countries and other stakeholders” (Keynote)
  • 9.
    “Remote participation inclusive2 vs “Not enough just to be in the room: how can remote participants be involved in decisions made during a coffee break” (Inclusion)
  • 10.
    NOT: Actors, processes,and issues BUT: Issues, actors, and action spaces
  • 11.
    “A common languagethat is understandable to Human Right experts, IT developers, and business entrepreneurs is necessary” (Policy angles)
  • 12.
    • To mapor not to map? • How do we engage the business sector at ALL levels? • NETmundial – showbusiness vs new paradigm? • Human rights – the double-edged sword, ways forward? • ICANN – monopoly vs model of diversity?