Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 16th Nov 2005 18:35 UTC
The Bush administration and its critics at a UN summit have inked a broad agreement on global Internet management that will preclude any dramatic showdown this week. By signing the statement (.pdf), the Bush administration formally endorsed the creation of an 'Internet Governance Forum' that will meet for the first time in 2006 under the auspices of the UN. The forum is meant to be a central point for global discussions of everything from computer security and online crime to spam and other 'misuses of the Internet.' What the agreement does not do is require the US to relinquish its unique influence over the Internet's operations.
Thread beginning with comment 61263
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
That goes for the Internet too. I'm all for the US controlling the technical part of the Internet, IF that control is limited to keeping it running smoothly. However, any content control should be avoided, with the exception of reducing malicious content. By malicious, I mean malicious or harmful to the person or persons receiving the content (offense isn't harm), or to their computers (malware, DRM), or harmful to the functioning of the Internet itself (malware, spam).
This statement is almost correct. You forgot the condition of if the content is harmful or threatens harm to the person in the content (aka child pornography).
The only problem is that some governmental organizations (like the Bush administration) also want to restrict behavior that they consider immoral, even though that behavior is legal in the US, and certainly legal in most of the areas outside of it. That kind of restriction is unacceptable. With any luck this oversight commitee will be able to keep this in check.
The United States is probably the best country to run the internet because of its laws. For example the goverment cannot do anything to you for speaking out against it (just as you did). It will act against people that threaten other people but that falls under the first part of my post. The US does not apply a filter to the internet and its people would be against it if the goverment tried. Name one instance of actual censorship China style. No the suggestion of not implementing .xxx domains is not censorship. That in no way restricts somebodies freedom of speech.
Lastly you are wrong in thinking that the UN is not corrupt and that it has the capability to oversee anybody in this matter. It's own constitution does not give you the right to free speech. It states that you can say anything as long as it is not against the interest of the UN. This means that the UN would be *more* likely to censor the internet than the US would.