Home > Internet > Spin Sets in on Internet Governance Compromise Spin Sets in on Internet Governance Compromise Submitted by Andy Updegrove 2005-11-18 Internet 17 Comments “So who blinked in Tunis – the US or everybody else? After two years of bickering, it looks like it was everybody else, and that the US will still control the root directory of the Internet. Of course, that depends on who’s doing the spinning.” About The Author Thom Holwerda Follow me on Mastodon @firstname.lastname@example.org 17 Comments 2005-11-18 4:11 pm Anonymous if it aint broke, don’t fix it. i dont trust some governments managing sections of the root servers. as it is various governments try their best to spy on, restrict or censore their citizen’s net usage. it would be a terrible day that those government’s get any sort of control over the internet. 2005-11-18 4:26 pm Anonymous Couldn’t agree more. WHile personally I would have no issues with a well laid out multi-national non-govt body overseeing the net, the UN (which is full of tin horn dictator types) WAS NOT a solution by any stretch. While a lot of folks will try to spin this (especially those that can’t stand the USA (popular stance to take anymore, grin). To such folks (if you want to have fun with ’em), just ask them to name one time where an issue (be specific) came up with the current setup and it could be reasonably expected that the UN (or any other controlling body) would of ruled/acted in a better fashion for all that is involved. This leaves them sputtering and stumbling. It isn’t broke, the US government itself has little control (ICANN is a NGO) and I’ve yet to hear a compelling reason for change beyond someone else wanting to control things (often those folks motives are more murky than the current setup). Before you flame (ignored, I will not be replying to any posts against/for mine, arguing on the net is useless and changes nothing in the end game), may I suggest folks actually go read the proposals and texts of the hearings, some of this stuff being proposed should scare the pants off you. I know I’m glad that things are being left as is, maybe not 100%, but what other governing body would be? JT 2005-11-18 4:49 pm Sphinx For sure, just can’t trust them foreigners. 2005-11-18 11:19 pm rcsteiner Nope. Not until they manage to organize effectively. 🙂 2005-11-18 4:49 pm Shaman >i dont trust some governments managing sections of >the root servers. as it is various governments try >their best to spy on, restrict or censore their >citizen’s net usage. it would be a terrible day that >those government’s get any sort of control over the >internet. You should see the “lawful intercept” laws they’re trying to get through legislature in Canada right now. With it, up to five different agencies could tap any TCP/IP stream (or all of it) on an ISP’s backbone at any time, with up to 10% of the customer base being investigated at any time. BTW, they want the ISPs to foot the bill. 2005-11-18 5:15 pm Smartpatrol This is a far cry from the Chinese government shutting down a companies outsourced engineering departments internet access because they detected someone on that network perusing an un approved website. Then imagine me trying to figure out why the company I worked for at the time was having a network outage in that region. Still there are people on these boards that think it’s a good idea for countries like China to have control of the Root DNS servers on the internet I don’t understand some people. 2005-11-18 5:12 pm Moulinneuf Neither blinked , the UN said they would go forward in making the internet a legal means of communication as they proposed to do in the first place , The US proposed some forums , to discuss the options and details and since they are part of the UN and since it cant harm to discuss futur plan everyone agreed , the US once again falsely claimed governance and ownership over ICANN as they did previously , but they are delusionnal ICANN is a non profit ORG. The radical and the US will insult each other at every forum meetings and as usual the people who are in charge will let them insult each other and forge the new guideline for the internet from the people who will be making realistic sugestions. My take : ICANN will stay the same , The UN will have added the internet as a new legal mean of communication , wich will give it more protection ( email will be threated the same as mail and phone conversations , hence the ISP will have to provide a better level of service with more reliability forced on all of them , it will have a group like ITU implementing suggestive protocol guideline , the UN will implement global specific law to prosecute the illegal thing happening on it ( child pornography , illegal transactions , mass spam , fraud ) , everybody will sign on it. There also probably going to propose to help the technlogical divide between rich and poor country where the Rich one will offer the poor one some goodies and technological expertise. China , India and Africa will probably get the permission to add some new root server as long as they are under ICANN supervision. The people in charge have decided to put the internet as a legal means of Global communication , just like phone and tv and satellites , all global communication are under the UN. Thats about it. 2005-11-18 5:32 pm archiesteel No one said “give China control of the Root DNS”…The proposal was to give the U.N. control over the root DNS. You know, the same U.N. that passed the declaration of human rights? Some extremists in the U.S. seem to believe that the U.N. is “full of tinpot” dictators, but the fact of the matter is that the great majority of U.N. countries are democracies. After all, China censors the Internet right now, with the help of U.S. companies. There’s absolutely no reason to believe that things would be worse under an independent international body. Then again, there’s no reasoning with the anti-U.N. paranoids. Watch out for those black helicopters! 2005-11-18 5:59 pm Snapper “After all, China censors the Internet right now, with the help of U.S. companies. There’s absolutely no reason to believe that things would be worse under an independent international body. ” What is the difference of who does the work if a soverign government dictates the laws? It could just as easily be a French or German or Dutch company doing the work. 2005-11-18 10:37 pm archiesteel What’s your point? I’m trying to figure it out, but really I can’t see what it is you’re trying to say. 2005-11-18 5:59 pm Moulinneuf “The proposal was to give the U.N. control over the root DNS. ” No , the only one even discussing that is the US , what everyone whant is a body like ITU overseeing that the internet is protected in the same way as phone , satellites and mail communications , true legal means and that everyone agree on the same standard. ICANN as control over the ROOT DNS , its a non profit ORG 2005-11-18 5:34 pm archiesteel You mean, just like the U.S. has been doing for years with Carnivore? Well, at least they didn’t try to pass the bill on to ISPs, I’ll grant you that. If you think the proposed Canadian bills are bad (and they are), I suggest you go and read the Patriot Act one of these days. BTW, the Canadian bills won’t pass, as we’re going into elections within the next two months. 2005-11-18 7:05 pm CanuckleFrog US retains control – http://antizealot.blogspot.com/ 2005-11-18 10:39 pm archiesteel Enough with your shameless self-promotion already. For weeks all you’ve been posting is a few words, then a link to your brain-dead blog…that’s really pathetic. 2005-11-18 11:27 pm CanuckleFrog I’m sure you’re interested in the facts http://antizealot.blogspot.com/ 2005-11-18 11:32 pm archiesteel Figure you’d respond like a spambot, since that’s about the level of intelligence one can find on your lame blog. 2005-11-19 5:44 pm Anonymous I don’t believe any government should exercise control over the web nor should it be any of their business. The US didn’t own the first BBS I dialed into many years ago. Individuals should control the web. It should remain the wild wild west and non-governed. No one knew the web would grow to what it is, it should remain free and grow. It’s governement intervention that ruins just about everything. Money in it? Power in it? Write laws and take control. ICANN is an organization. Not a government or US government led body. So far in the US, the government has pretty much ruined everything in the last 50 years writing laws and taking away rights. The web is about all that’s left that doesn’t have a hand out by a politition everytime you login.