Stakeholders from all of the above-mentioned groups and more gathered at the in Indonesia, October 22-25, 2013, to discuss all manner of issues related to including online surveillance, privacy, big data, online child protection, youth perspectives, cybersecurity and cybercrime, freedom of expression, ?and?access to information, human rights in context of the Internet, jurisdictional conflicts and harmonization, international development, and of course, intellectual property (relating mostly to copyright and domain names). First convened by the United Nations in 2006, the IGF is the world's largest and highest-profile conference wholly dedicated to the betterment of the Internet and its continued governance and preservation. With no binding goals, negotiations, or decision , the ostensibly affair provides a platform for otherwise-rare direct dialogue between multiple cross-sections of society and mass cross-pollination of ideas, general principles, and best practices, which can be taken back by members to be used in their own decision-making processes.

This year, the Indonesian government¡ªwhose national population includes over 63 million Internet users¡ªhosted approximately 2000 delegates from 111 countries, who explored this year's across 135 workshops, focus sessions, open forums, roundtables, and panels (with more participating remotely and millions checking in on Twitter). Organizers made a concerted effort to integrate into the sessions more tangible policy outcomes that participants could take away with them, as well as attention to initiatives. Meanwhile, ¡° ¡± and ¡°¡± constituted an underlying all discussions, while ¡°¡± and ¡°¡± infused electric static into the air.

As providing complete coverage of all news, events, discussions, and ideas that emerged during the week-long IGF within one post would be impossible, this article will restrict itself to highlighting certain issues directly encompassed by intellectual property law, particularly those explored in a titled, ¡°¡±.

1. Square Laws in Round Processes: Has Copyright Policy Gone Awry With Respect To Technological Reality?

This question challenges the notion that current and trending copyright legal frameworks are at all suitable for the way Internet infrastructures and associated technologies work today, suggesting increasing misalignment between laws designed in a more analog world and technological processes where copying is strictly incidental to otherwise legitimate use of the work. Glenn Deen of NBCUniversal asserted that technology should be ¡°policy-neutral¡±, as in developed without any particular policy favoured or hindered by or coded into the technology itself. In other words, copyright policies should be created such that they fit the technology, rather than the other way around. Other panellists agreed but maintained this is currently not the case¡ªtechnology has not been made policy-neutral, and through phenomena such as institutional capture of standards fora, it has in fact been designed to promote and enforce certain policies (examples of this are technological protection measures (TPM) and digital rights management (DRM) systems). , argues , takes the Internet for granted and distorts its basic architecture, such as by turning neutral online intermediaries into unofficial law enforcement entities with respect to user behaviour.

2. The Librarians Strike Back: This Isn't the Copying You're Looking For

of the made a compelling case for copyright law to pay closer attention to the kind of copying involved in different situations. Sharing others' concerns over unbalanced copyright frameworks, she explained how in a library research access context provides a clear illustration of copyright laws not fitting an Internet environment. According to Broad, text and data mining is one of several ¡°productive, non-harmful uses¡± that operated freely outside the realm of copyright in a print environment, but are now captured by copyright frameworks purely through the incidental copying that occurs as part of Internet-enabled technological processes today. She compared licensing text and data mining, in essence the extraction of information, to ¡°placing a toll on the information highway¡±.

While Article 5.1 of the exempts "[t]emporary acts of reproduction...which are transient or incidental [and] an integral and essential part of a technological process,¡± in transmitting content between computers, this is a narrow exception that will not encompass all cases that require protection, such as text and data mining. Furthermore, as Broad points out, such a framework presumes infringement unless proven otherwise; one must make an exception rather than find the use not infringing at all to begin with.

Lastly, e-books and their associated licensing regimes present ¡°a huge challenge¡± in terms of access for consumers, academics, public libraries, and the visually impaired, among other user groups. With respect to the visually impaired, users must overcome obstacles by acquiring a right to remove from the content (recently enshrined in the universally lauded , the first-ever agreement to limit rather than expand copyright), and by possessing the technical ability to actually remove the TPM and access the content through assistive devices. In these respects, some at the IGF spoke of licensing regimes ¡°defeating the purposes of the Internet¡±, particularly in the context of , where public libraries can play a valuable role in providing access to information.

3. Say It to Belie It: The Language of Limits and Exceptions in Copyright Law

One current problem that IGF 2013 participants identified with current copyright law is its unbalanced nature: in many jurisdictions and on an international level, rather than balancing copyright against user/access rights as if the latter were of equal weight, laws provide for overarching copyright with specific exceptions that are explicitly carved out. The starting point of the law is not one where the limits and exceptions hold the same weight as copyright; this is reinforced by their being referred to precisely as ¡°limits¡± and ¡°exceptions¡± to an otherwise default backdrop of established copyright. Speakers suggested instituting a new international norm that would conceptually elevate rights of access and other ¡°limits¡± or ¡°exceptions¡± to the same level as copyright in order to better protect them, as seen in the Marrakesh Treaty. As asserted, ¡°We often talk about copyright substantive rights...and having carve-outs for limitations and exceptions.... [W]e should dispatch with that language and think about them as equal partners balancing each other.¡±

4. Meanwhile at WIPO: Additional Issues & Initiatives

Initiatives and ideas beyond those outlined above were featured in IGF 2013 presentations. These included - according to WIPO legal officer Paolo Lanteri - the ; a WIPO study on and a WIPO-compatible, world-standardized licence (to be released within the next few weeks). Regarding the latter, Ari Gema of Creative Commons Indonesia pointed out the need to educate the general population on the concept of copyright before introducing the Creative Commons license, hinting at cultural and regional differences in the significance and relevance of copyright, and the potential implications for corresponding law, regulation, and policy.

Lest the Marrakesh Treaty be a one-time in terms of internationally-accepted limitations to copyright, the IFLA is working on a , to establish ¡°a binding international instrument on copyright limitations and exceptions to enable libraries to preserve their collections, support education and research, and lend materials¡±.

Lastly, in keeping with the spirit of IGF, a panel titled, "" that "multistakeholderism" was the preferred approach to formulating internet copyright policy and frameworks going forward, despite drawbacks such as being potentially inefficient, time-consuming, or inconclusive.

5. Say ÄãºÃ?to §ñ§Ù§í§Ü.?????(aka Internationalized Domain Names)!

In a palpable boost to principles of multilingual access and globalization of the Internet, CEO Fadi Chehad¨¦ revealed at the IGF 2013 opening ceremony, to rousing applause, that Arabic, Russian, and Chinese i were delegated to the Internet root for the first time. This means that one can now register websites ending in ¡°dot [insert Arabic, Cyrillic, or Chinese characters here]¡±, resulting in expanded online accessibility for those who use technology¡ªincluding keyboards¡ªexclusively in one of the three languages added. This will likely have an impact on trademark law in different parts of the world, in the context of branding and domain names, although trademark as managed by the (TMCH) currently provide for ASCII (English and Latin) characters alone.

Logging Out

As mentioned above, this was but a peephole into the ongoings of IGF 2013. Even live, it could only be experienced in self-tailored slices given how much was going on at any given moment. For those who are interested in learning more, are available on the IGF website and further comments and insights abound on the Twitter backchannel, not to mention the multitude of papers, articles, blog posts, updates, and analyses written throughout and in response to the forum. If we care about preserving, protecting, and bettering the Internet as we know it, the least we can do is start by getting to know it.

Cynthia Khoo is a JD Candidate at the University of Victoria. She is currently completing an exchange semester at the National University of Singapore, Faculty of Law.?

The post When the Internet Has a Party, Everyone's Invited: IP Law Issues at the Internet Governance Forum 2013 appeared first on IPOsgoode.

At least, that's how ICANN may feel in the wake of last week's ¡°¡± panel at the??meeting in Toronto.

First, some background: ICANN is the?, an international non-profit responsible for the world's top level domains (TLDs). A TLD is the suffix of a website domain name: it's the ¡°.com¡± in?, or the ¡°.ca¡± in?, or the??¡°¡± in adult websites. For a more complete overview of ICANN and ICANN 45, see?.

Returning to the topic at hand: if the entire Internet were a single city,??would be the equivalent of urban planning and traffic policy. There are annual municipal council meetings in the form of the UN's??(IGF), whose seventh annual meeting takes place this November in Baku, Azerbaijan. The panel in Toronto thus offered stakeholders a crucial opportunity to share regional developments, raise key issues, and exchange views in preparation for the IGF and additional conferences (see:?,,?). Given discursive sheers, a topiarist might prune four themes from the discussion that unfolded: regional IGFs, the role of governments, multi-stakeholder models and ¡°Enhanced Cooperation¡±, and the role of international telecommunications regulations.

To begin, lest anyone think this is a case of one IGF to rule them all, the panel exchanged updates with representatives from the first?, first?,?first?,,?,?,?,?, and?. Issues included: need for infrastructure enhancement, legislative facilitation of internet and communications technology, telecommunications tasks, bottom-up community initiatives, public?,??and trust on the Internet,?,?, and a desire to see concrete results from IGFs. Speakers reiterated the need to ensure ideas and concerns flow from national, to regional, to international levels, in a way that results in understanding, good decisions, and infomed policies.

Such decisions and policies often come from government, so it's no surprise that??formed another theme.??of ICANN's Country Code Names Supporting Organization (), which specifically steward country code TLDs (ccTLDs)¡ªthink??and .ca¡ªoccupy a unique role in this context. They have close working relationships with their respective governments but must remain sensitive to the surrounding policy environment. According to CIRA president and CEO Byron Holland, this sometimes sparks tension with their on-the-ground work overseeing the??and operating ¡°the blinking lights and routers¡±.

While according to ICANN veteran?,?said blinking lights and routers are filling increasing space in high-level government portfolios,?a fine line typically exists between participation and??when it comes to government. ICANN's????does not change this. With the Internet Governance landscape undergoing?upheaval and?, however, all involved have placed particular emphasis on hearing equally from all voices, all sectors, and all levels of civil society, while mitigating excess?. Still, as some have?, such an endeavour is?.

This brings us to the nebulous concept of ¡°¡±. The ¡°creative ambiguity¡±-infused term has engendered??since its 2005??debut, from minimally impoving status quo to striking a special?. The panel made clear, however, the undesirability of a single comprehensive body for Internet Governance, which could undermine the multi-stakeholder philosophy and prove too close to government-like or intergovernmental Internet regulation for comfort.

This is why many have??with the International Telecommunication Union () and its upcoming World Conference on International Communications () in Dubai. Founded as the International Telegraph Union in 1865, the ITU has since evolved with the times and appears intent on continuing the trend. To what extent is a question that will be answered at WCIT, which will see the International Telecommunications Regulations () updated for the first time since 1988.

While panellists appeared wary of potential ITU encroachment upon Internet processes, AT&T's??reminded participants that ITRs nevertheless serve an important purpose, and that what circumstances ultimately necessitate is that ICANN maintain a clear position of distinguishing between internet governance, broader internet policy, and traditional telecommunications regulation. Still,??that the ITU will attempt to ¡°¡±. The ITU??this notion; others suggest fears are??if not, and problematic if one looks at it from a??.

At the end of the day, a reminder by ICANN board member??would seem to be an appropriate conclusion, in light of yet more???: ICANN has developed Internet Governance on a basis of building tangible structures and processes to solve specific problems, and stakeholders should keep this in mind during the Internet Governance equivalent of ¡°theological discussions¡±. After all, no matter how much planning goes into a good hedge maze, there always remains the possibility of unexpected dead ends revealed on the ground.

Cynthia Khoo is a JD Candidate at the University of Victoria.

The post Bonsai This Is Not: ICANN and the Internet Governance Landscape appeared first on IPOsgoode.