Should America control the Internet?

Jandor

Jandor

Newbie
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
539
Reaction score
4
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4327928.stm

BBC said:
Net power struggle nears climax

The US has got an image problem when it comes to the internet.

It is seen as arrogant and determined to remain the sheriff of the world wide web, regardless of whatever the rest of the world may think.

It has even lost the support of the European Union. It stands alone as the divisive battle over who runs the internet heads for a showdown at a key UN summit in Tunisia next month.

The stakes are high, with the European Commissioner responsible for the net, Viviane Reding, warning of a potential web meltdown.

"The US is absolutely isolated and that is dangerous," she said during a briefing with journalists in London.

"Imagine the Brazilians or the Chinese doing their own internet. That would be the end of the story.

"I am very much afraid of a fragmented internet if there is no agreement."

Brokering the peace

The UN has been wrestling over who should run the internet for a number of years. It was one of the issues which divided nations at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva two years ago.

The second phase of the UN conference is due to take place in Tunisia from the 16 to 18 November.

Currently a California-based group called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) is the nearest thing to a ruling body.

The private company was set up by the US Department of Commerce to oversee the domain name and addressing systems, such as country domain suffixes. It manages how net browsers and e-mail programs direct traffic.

Icann was to gain its independence from the Department of Commerce by September 2006. But in July the US said it would "maintain its historic role in authorising changes or modifications to the authoritative root zone file".

America's determination to remain the ultimate purveyor of the internet has angered other countries which believe it is time to come up with a new way of regulating the digital traffic of the 21st century.

In the face of opposition from countries such as China, Iran and Brazil, and several African nations, the US is now isolated ahead of November's UN summit.

The row threatens to overshadow talks on other issues such as bringing more people online and tackling spam e-mail.

Global forum

America's traditional ally, Europe, has been left trying to find a way of brokering the peace.

"There is a problem as many parts of the world don't like the fact that one country is linked to the organism that technically rules the internet," said Commissioner Reding. "Many countries would like a multilateral approach."

On the table are European proposals for some kind of international forum to discuss principles for running the internet.

The EU does not intend to scrap Icann. It would continue in its current technical role.

Instead Europe is suggesting a way of allowing countries to express their position on internet issues, though the details on how this would happen are vague.

"We have no intention to regulate the internet," said Commissioner Reding, reassuring the US that the EU was not proposing setting up a new global body.

Rather she talked of a "model of cooperation", of an international forum to discuss the internet.

Her carefully chosen form of words may help assuage a Bush administration which is vehemently opposed to any kind of international body to govern the internet.

"I am sure we will find a solution in interests of the internet," said Mrs Reding. "We think we could have an agreement on what's on the table."
Click to expand...
 
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GJ13Aa01.html

Times said:
US grip on the Internet challenged
By Seema Sirohi

ROME - A high-stakes battle is raging over who should control the Internet, the world's most powerful communication tool that has arguably become an important vehicle of globalization.

Not the Americans, is the message from the rest of the world. Last week, high-level talks in Geneva failed to resolve the dispute as the European Union broke ranks with the US government and joined Brazil, China and Iran in demanding an end to America's supervision of the Internet.

While many countries demand nothing less than "regime change", others say the United States should practice what it preaches and instill some democracy in the abstruse governance of the Internet.

If another round of meetings fails to break the deadlock, the World Summit on the Information Society in Tunis next month will be dead on arrival. The summit was to pronounce on the future of the Internet, but the row is likely to overshadow other crucial issues such as bringing more people online and fighting spam e-mails. In the absence of a peaceful compromise, the biggest losers will be an estimated 1 billion people who use the Internet.

In the worst case scenario, dubbed by cyber pundits as the "nuclear option", the Internet could fracture into multiple networks that may be incompatible with each other. It would be nothing less than Balkanization of the virtual world - a web meltdown where two computers might find different websites at the same numerical address.

Brazil, Iran, Cuba and China want the creation of a new international body to govern the Internet, either through the United Nations or an independent organization. The Americans, deeply allergic to even the smell of the United Nations, vehemently oppose handing over this powerful tool to a bunch of bickering bureaucrats, many of whom will surely rise from countries on Washington's blacklist.

Incidentally, Iran - currently the cause of American ulcers - was active in Geneva opposing the domination of any "single government" in running the Internet. Brazil was equally vehement in its statement when it said bluntly: "On Internet governance, three words come to mind: lack of legitimacy. In our digital world, only one nation decides for all of us."

The European Union, traditionally America's ally in all things important, decided even it couldn't live with US monopoly for all time and joined other nations in calling for a larger inter-governmental body to oversee the Internet.

But the US government appears equally determined to maintain its hold. Both the executive and legislative branches of the government are united in their aim to keep the reins firmly in Washington's hands.

Joe Barton, chairman of the Energy and Commerce committee in the US House of Representatives, wrote to the chief US negotiator, David Gross, saying that the US must continue its "historic role" in governing the Internet and exercise "strong oversight".

Given such a mandate, it was no surprise that Gross said in Geneva, "What we are not interested in ... is the establishment of a new international institution to regulate the Internet." The uncompromising American stance made a compromise difficult, which in turn led to the EU abandoning the US camp.

Viviane Reding, the EU commissioner for cyber matters, said the Americans were "absolutely isolated and that is dangerous". Anticipating a nasty virtual war, she asked to imagine the unimaginable - the Brazilians or the Chinese creating their own Internet. "That would be the end of the story."

Indeed. Control rather than free flow of information would be the rule of the day, warn experts. Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden, wrote: "It would be profoundly dangerous to now set up an international mechanism, controlled by governments, to take over the running of the Internet. Not only would this play into the hands of regimes bent on limiting the freedom that the Internet can bring, it also risks stifling innovation."

So how does the United States control the Internet? The US Commerce Department effectively supervises Internet traffic because it approves changes to the Internet's "root zone files" or master directories. In other words, the US government has veto power and can theoretically deny access.

The Americans justify their control because the Internet was created thanks to a Pentagon project. Funded by the US Defense Department, the project was designed to create links among computer networks. But for the system to function, a master list was needed to direct data to the correct destination.

To manage the master files, the Commerce Department founded the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers or ICANN. The California-based organization administers master directories, which instruct web browsers and e-mail programs on how to direct traffic.

ICANN, which was created on a contract by the US Commerce Department, was to gain independence in 2006 but President George W Bush said in July that the US would "maintain its historic role in authorizing changes or modifications" to the master lists to "preserve security and stability".

Bush's statement raised hell in various capitals around the world where the Internet is as feared as it is admired for its vast ability to stream through to the individual and past the police check posts. But many countries also fear that the US can arbitrarily deny requests for changes in the files depending on who's out of favor with Washington. So far, that hasn't happened but diplomats don't want to leave such a possibility for the future.

There is no doubt that geopolitics forms the backdrop to the battle for control. The EU, Brazil, Russia and China have had enough of the American "unilateral approach" to world affairs since the Iraq war. They want to send a signal that the US can't dominate the digital world.

As for developing countries, they are already angry with the US and Europe for gobbling up most of the available addresses needed for computers to connect, leaving only a few for the rest of the world to share.

The Americans, for their part, don't want to lose control of this powerful tool to countries such as China that are fast emerging as potential rivals for superpower status. Already on the defensive by a fast-rising China, the Americans would like to put some brakes on the dragon.

The Americans are also deeply concerned about terrorists using the Internet. With multiple masters, the Internet would be easier to abuse because it would be more difficult to monitor.

But the Americans seem to be alone in their stand. The Europeans are trying to craft a compromise that would create an international forum where other countries can discuss their concerns while ICANN would continue to be the technical administrator.

While the bellicose Bush administration may not the best example for civil liberties, communist China, a theocratic Iran or a fundamentalist Saudi Arabia might be worse for deciding the fate of a free Internet, say analysts.

Seema Sirohi is a Rome-based correspondent.
Click to expand...
 
I shall e-terrorise them if they do!
 
If any country has the right to control the internet its Switzerland. No one should 'contol' the internet. The point of it is a free exchange of informantion and if George Bush doesn't like it he can go f*cking himself.

Why do they think someone should oversee the internet anyway FFS.
 
For April Fool's, we should let the Chinese control the internet for the whole day. The world would never be the same.
 
It's a widely believed fact that Hetairia already control it.

-Angry Lawyer
 
Now that's a ****ing good idea, Riomhaire. If I remember correctly, it was in Gibson's Virtual Light. In that, the internet/global comms was almost entirely based in Costa Rica, where it was maintained and kept in unison but not, crucially, strictly controlled. They made so much money from it they were able to focus on making the country a really nice place to be in with a beautiful environment. :D
 
Sulkdodds said:
Now that's a ****ing good idea, Riomhaire. If I remember correctly, it was in Gibson's Virtual Light. In that, the internet/global comms was almost entirely based in Costa Rica, where it was maintained and kept in unison but not, crucially, strictly controlled. They made so much money from it they were able to focus on making the country a really nice place to be in with a beautiful environment. :D
Click to expand...
I've lost you. I was saying that it shouldn't be contolled.
 
ríomhaire said:
I've lost you. I was saying that it shouldn't be contolled.
Click to expand...

I think he was refering to your Switzerland comment.
 
Yes. A unified internet sustained from within an entirely neutral country seems like a good idea.
 
Honestly, the US should control the entire world, but the Illuminati beat us to it
 
In Soviet Russia, internet control you!



...I'll get my coat.
 
Riomhaire said:
Why do they think someone should oversee the internet anyway FFS.
Click to expand...

Because someone has got to hand out I.P addresses and such.
It dosn't need controlling but it needs overseeing, otherwise it wouldn't work.
 
Sulkdodds said:
Yes. A unified internet sustained from within an entirely neutral country seems like a good idea.
Click to expand...
I meant because it was invented there, not cause it's neutral.
 
Yes, America need to control the internet, because I heard that there's weapons of mass destruction hidden in .ir domains.
 
America does indeed need to 'control' (read oversee) the internet (see ICANN). As much as I like the concept of the UN, it does not currently work properly. I'd hate to think what it'd be like if Russia, China and others got a hand in the decisions, and let's face it, the US have got a proven track record of never actually interfering with it.

What exactly does anybody gain right now from giving it to a comission split between a bunch of countries who'd just censor and monitor it, and a bunch who're terrified of terrorism? Nothing at all.

Just leave it as it is, as there's been no problem at all so far.
 
kirovman said:
Yes, America need to control the internet, because I heard that there's weapons of mass destruction hidden in .ir domains.
Click to expand...
I also heard that a country called U-S and A has alot of WMDs, AND oil!!

Anyway, the pope should control the internet.
The pope sees you.. :O
 
we made it. the dns servers will have to be in some country unless they are to be placed floating in the middle of the ocean. except someone would have to create the floating platform, so that would outrage the europeans. honestly it works fine how it is.. the us government has SO little control over the internet.
 
lol, id have a strong bet that they woulds pass some internet laws if they did, like the world wide digital version of the patriot act :/

Giving them the rights to hack and look into your computer if you are a 'suspected' terrorist.
 
Oh please. The internet has been "owned" by the US since its inception. Changing that would only cause problems.
 
No one should run the internet. I am uncontrollable!
 
kirovman said:
In Soviet Russia, internet control you!



...I'll get my coat.
Click to expand...
haha at this post.. i rarely laugh out loud on these forums but for some reason that was really funny
 
I don't give a shit who controls the internet, as long as its very well protected from sabotage, and has very high performance.
 
clarky003 said:
lol, id have a strong bet that they woulds pass some internet laws if they did, like the world wide digital version of the patriot act :/

Giving them the rights to hack and look into your computer if you are a 'suspected' terrorist.
Click to expand...
Lol reminds me, a group of Belgian hackers once was able to down 3 of the main "internet" servers (there are 7, IIRC). These "servers" direct all the traffic throughout the world. Bringing all 7 of them offline at the same time would result in almost total halt of digital traffic. As long as one stays up, internet will keep flowing, just slower and with more unreachable computers.
 
giving it to the Americans is like giving it to a Chimpanse horde HAAHHAHAA

Always invading the other tribes, always thinking of its own, always think they are the best...

Nah, Sweden should have control, or ells we will be all brain Dead Republicants by the end of this month.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
HL2.NET HORROR SLAP
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Lizardizzle
2019: The year of Half-Life SFX videos
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ennui
Ennui
Tollbooth Willie
thanks guys
Replies
1
Views
1K
Shem
Shem
TechnoHippyChic
The Many Diversions of THC's Work Lunches
Replies
3
Views
2K
TechnoHippyChic
TechnoHippyChic
Back
Top