[ga] Re: [Ecommerce] FYI: the economist on US and internet governance

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Manon and all,

ICANN has shown clearly that it has done a horrible
job in many respects in it's stuartship role.  DOC/NTIA
has had to chastise the ICANN Board and two of it's
CEO's for bumbling several concerning issues.

The UN on the other hand cannot divest itself from
internal corruption and as such is not well suited
to manage much of anything until it cleans up it's
own house.  Hence as this administration rightly resists
such notions from the UN in any management role
of the internet. Going from the frying pan into the
fire is not a very good idea.

Manon Ress wrote:

> The Economist
> October 8, 2005
> U.S. Edition
> SECTION: LEADER
>
> America rules OK
> Internet governance
>
> Plans for global management of the internet are a threat to its future
>
> WHY should America control the internet? A growing number of
> governments are asking this apparently reasonable question. At a
> diplomatic meeting last week in Geneva, the European Union
> unexpectedly dropped its support for the current arrangement, and
> sided with America's critics ()see page 80. America could now find
> itself isolated as negotiations over future regulation of the
> internet continue.
>
> The critics' point of view seems quite understandable. The internet
> is not just a hugely important tool of global communication but also
> an engine of economic growth. Other countries quite understandably
> balk at American hegemony over something that matters so much to
> their future. Yet although America's exercise of power in the bricks-
> and-mortar world may not always have been flawless, its oversight of
> the internet, which it invented (Tim Berners-Lee, a Briton, is
> sometimes credited with the feat, but he created the world wide web)
> has been remarkably benign. That's probably partly because politics
> has been kept out of it. The longer it stays that way, the better.
>
> Most people think of the internet as decentralised and thus
> uncontrollable. That's largely true; nevertheless, its infrastructure
> requires some co-ordination, so it needs a bit of governance. This is
> currently done by a non-profit group called the Internet Corporation
> for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). This organisation operates
> under a contract from the American government, and consults private-
> sector firms and groups of techies and users.
>
> Much of ICANN's work is boringly technical. It co-ordinates such
> features as domain names (like .com or .net), routing numbers and
> technical standards. But small technical details can sometimes have
> big political ramifications, and ICANN has often found itself
> embroiled in controversy. For example, many countries were outraged
> when ICANN considered creating a .xxx domain name for pornographic
> websites. (It diplomatically put the idea on hold.)
>
> Nevertheless, ICANN's stewardship has succeeded because its focus has
> been not on politics, but on making the network as efficient as
> possible. The sometimes fierce debates that break out among techies
> have been conducted transparently. The result has been an internet
> open to innovation and free expression, led mostly by the private
> sector and relatively free from government interference.
>
> Yet because the system runs under American auspices, other countries
> are unhappy with this arrangement. Many of those who want to relieve
> America of its control think ICANN's job should be taken over by a
> United Nations agency.
>
> To anybody who has spent much time observing the UN at work, this
> sounds like a poor idea. It is no accident that the world's telephone
> systems remained so expensive and static for so long. They have been
> heavily regulated nationally and their international links have been
> controlled by the International Telecommunication Union, a UN body
> which once rejected the idea of the internet in favour of a more
> controllable and less efficient system. That standard never amounted
> to much. The ITU's approach reflected the interests of state-run
> telecom monopolies, which themselves are now being shaken to their
> foundations by the internet.
>
> It is also no accident that many of the countries loudest in their
> demands for the internet to be taken out of American hands are those,
> such as China, Iran and Saudi Arabia, that are keenest on restricting
> its use by their own citizens. These and many other countries are
> hoping to use the lead-up to the UN's World Summit on the Information
> Society to begin to wrest control away from America. By changing its
> position last week the EU had hoped to act as a "bridge" between
> America and other countries. Instead, it has simply isolated America,
> with potentially damaging results.
>
> America has offered olive branches to its critics. This summer, it
> acknowledged that other countries have sovereignty over their
> national addresses, and said it would never disrupt the system (ie,
> kick France's .fr address offline). And, at the meeting last week in
> Geneva, it supported the idea of a forum in which all governments can
> discuss these matters in an "evolutionary process". That sounds like
> an excellent scheme: just as startling as the speed of technological
> development is the slowness of decision-making in international
> forums. If this move works, it should succeed in parking the issue
> harmlessly for many years.
> ###
>
> ************************************************
> Manon Anne Ress
> manon.ress@xxxxxxxxxx,
> www.cptech.org
>
> Consumer Project on Technology
> 1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA
> Tel.:  +1.202.332.2670, Ext 16 Fax: +1.202.332.2673
>
> Consumer Project on Technology
> 1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
> Tel: +41 22 791 6727
>
> Consumer Project on Technology
> 24 Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX, UK
> Tel: +44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252 Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ecommerce mailing list
> Ecommerce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ecommerce

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obediance of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827