Does the internet belong to America, or to the world? That is the essential question being asked by the UN. They are seeking to have the Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the body that governs internet addresses, absorbed into the UN's International Telecommunications Union. Why? Because UN countries do not like the fact they can't influence the internet (such as President Bush stopping .xxx domains from being established). They also dislike not being able to tax commerce on the internet.
Senator Norm Coleman (Republican, Minnesota) has introduced a new resolution to give the ICANN political protections for the coming World Summit on the Information Society. There is a fear that international governance could result in both taxes that may stifle internet commerce and censorship of websites by governments.
While the internet belongs to everyone, someone needs to watch over. The internet has developed into a network that is infused with freedom and choice, with success of individual sites mostly dictated by the world's users. If control is given to other countries, sites may disappear due to political reasons. Or even worse, disputes will arise between multiple countries and certain issues could stagnate, resulting in a pressing matter not being addressed and UN time being taken up by something as petty as domain names.
I think ICANN has managed things fine. The UN should be moving to insure that ICANN in not interfered with, and that the internet stays as free as it is now -- a global network without borders. It shouldn't be moving to confine it.
Related Stories: | Topics:Work/Life, politics + government, Internet, Science and Technology, Technology, Internet Domains, United Nations |
Email
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Buzz Up!
LinkedIn
Recent Comments | 17 Total
October 20, 2005 at 4:46pm by Joe
I don't think the folks who want to move control of ICANN to the UN have done a very good job of communicating the reason for this need. Until they can tell us what's wrong with the current system, I'll stay with the old adage: don't fix it if it's not broken.
October 20, 2005 at 5:45pm by Frank
US is being totally hypocritical. How can they say they that other Governments would interfere with the net when they already stopped XXX?
October 20, 2005 at 10:16pm by hobz
The U.N. is corrupt and inept. Moving the back bone of commerce and communications to the U.N. is going to cripple innovation and the free flow of ideas. Plus i already pay for internet access, why would I want to pay twice.
October 21, 2005 at 12:02am by Rex
US built and should control it as it is . Rex
October 21, 2005 at 2:25am by Martel
The United Nations is a incompetent organization that cannot manage the portfolio that it has now. It did such a great job on "Oil for Food" in Iraq! The United States is the only country on the face of the earth that could have developed the internet and it is the only country that will and can defend it against abusive, stifling taxes and political censorship. Would you want your rights of free political speech vetoed by the Chinese?
October 21, 2005 at 8:10am by yeah right
Well, do people really believe the US government's relunctance to loose control over the internet is just benign?
They just want to have absolute control of the internet because society has become more and more dependent on information technology. This is just another futile attempt to keep its status as a super power. The problem is that other countries do not want that, and this might give rise to "alternative" internets.
October 21, 2005 at 9:04am by shiva
"...The problem is that other countries do not want that, and this might give rise to "alternative" internets."
come again ?
so, we are supposed to believe those pathetic french and chinese will creat an "alternative" where you are censored and possibly TAXED....
yup...show me the way.....the crowds are just going to brat the door down right...
October 21, 2005 at 12:13pm by KJV
I think there should be some sort of governing body outside of the united states who should influence or have power as it relates to the internet. The US has done enough to alienate itself from the rest of the world - let's not suck up the power as it relates to the internet as well..
October 21, 2005 at 12:51pm by netpolitical
Why isn't .tw represented in the UN?
News from the .tw ccTLD, "Taiwan Deserves a Place in the United Nations":
It is almost unimaginable that there is one country, with a population greater than 140 of these UN member states, which is still barred from joining the United Nations. A democratic country with 23 million people, Taiwan is the world’s 17th largest economy and 15th largest trading nation.
. . .
It is most regrettable that Taiwan’s international status does not yet reasonably reflect its admirable political and economic achievements. At present, not only the United Nations but also its affiliated organizations adopt a discriminatory policy of segregation by shutting out Taiwan.
http://english.www.gov.tw/UN/index.jsp?categid=126&recordid=52554
October 21, 2005 at 5:10pm by Tamara
I think the control of the internet should stay in the US, we invented it why give it away. The other countries only want control of it so they can control the world, think about it. The internet is the "oil" in the telecommunication world. If we let the UN control the internet then THEY will control the information THEY want the poeple to know, and not alway the the truth. Do you want to be told what you can think and say.. And lets not start on the money side...talk about greed and control..SO KEEP CONTROL OF THE INTERNET IN THE USA.
October 21, 2005 at 6:15pm by Jonathan Pape
The US has already developed an alternative internet that runs much faster than the traditional internet. I see no problem handing off the current system to the UN to establish a better free market system.
October 21, 2005 at 8:54pm by Monty Hamilton
How disturbing! Some of the postings are so stereotypical of 'simple minded' US citizens (not all of them!).
Tim Berners-Lee - "the inventor of the World Wide Web" (born in London June 8, 1955)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_berners-lee
The Internet is a global communication tool that should be free of 'ownernership' or 'governance' by one particular country, the W3C should take governance of ICANN.
The US government have their hands full fighting nonsense wars and ensuring George W Bush stays free of 'lame duck' status.
October 21, 2005 at 9:58pm by Kenneth T. Embry
Asking the United States to give up control of the internet is like asking the middle East to give up control of its oil reserves.
Most of the developed world is dependent upon oil, but how much sense would it make for other countries to insist that the Middle East relinquish control of the oil simply because other countries would feel better if they had some control?
It would be unfathomable for the Saudis to give up their oil and likewise it would not make ANY sense at all for the U.S. to relinquish control of the internet.
October 22, 2005 at 12:59am by Jeff
Monty Hamilton clearly needs to do much more research before name calling.
Among several other aspects about the Internet, and as probably 99.9% of the people who read Fast Company already know (from Wikipedia too), "during the 1950s, several communications researchers realized that there was a need to allow general communication between users of various computers and communications networks. This led to research into decentralized networks, queuing theory, and packet switching. The subsequent creation of ARPANET in the United States in turn catalyzed a wave of technical developments that made it the basis for the development of the Internet."
As Tim Berners-Lee was one, of several, key contributors to activities that lead to commercialization of the Internet - don't confuse creation of hyperlinking with the invention of the Internet or that that single event lead to the commercialization of the Internet (aka WWW). Also, don't be so caught up in the media terms like "inventor of the WWW" or selfishly push your political views in a tech discussion - talk about being simple minded.
As for the UN boondoggle desire to run ICANN - as ICANN should be represented by international parties that are committed to the pure innovation of technology for the good of free societies (similar to W3C - which is NOT run by the UN in any manner) - therefore, the simple make-up of UN would clearly make it the worst recipe of characters to hi-jack ICANN - heck, the only way they can justify their desire to take ICANN over is that they "dislike not being able to tax commerce" or that they can't have UN.xxx.
October 22, 2005 at 5:41am by Risto
This is a perfect example of how quickly things become US vs the world, and equally perfect example of how much badwill the US has created for itself.
The Internet shouldn't be governed by any country, and if you think that US should keep whatever it built, you're pretty shortsighted. See, what goes around, comes around. Even Europeans might come up with an innovation some time.
October 25, 2005 at 12:26am by jeremiah
Attempting to control the internet is like trying to control the force of a huricane. It simply can not be done. The only way someone could take over and control the internet and apply taxes to those businesses is a government that controls the people. Don't waste your time on something that can not and will not come to pass. Do you really think the UN could deal with 100,000 peeved off hackers. I think not!
November 17, 2005 at 1:22pm by Vu
US. is the first country that established, built and developed the Internet. Also, it has governed the Internet so great. It makes no sense to give up the right to govern the Internet to other country or other body organization. Who wants to give away their own beloved child?