• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

UN wants to be the Internet police.....

XJEEPER

NAXJA Member # 13
NAXJA Member
Location
Wasatch Range
Enlightening read on a horrible idea.

"Delegates from 120 countries will gather under the auspices of the United Nations to consider a plan to take administrative control of the Internet away from the United States and hand it over to an international body run by the UN.

In short, governance of cyberspace will pass from the country that has kept it free and accessible since its creation—the United States—to the same organization that gave us the financial scandals at UNESCO, voted to designate Zionism as racism, and seated China, Syria, and Muammur Qaddafi’s Libya on its Commission on Human Rights."

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-uns-internet-grab/
 
not to mention....

handing over OUR invention.

Since it's Al Gores invention might as well let them have it. :laugh3::moon:
 
So what? We can always start up another of our own.

(Not the Internet, just an internet. Didn't you know they come in six-packs?)
 
so?

if the ITU decides to take away control from ICANN do you really think they can do it?

ICANN controls the DNS. They can go and create all the new domain levels and DNS servers they want, and in doing so they will cut themselves off from the established internet.

ICANN doesn't HAVE to do squat that the UN tells them to, they are independent and that's precisely why it was created as an independent entity, to be free from the control of governments.
 
Good point, Zaphod...

Although I often think that the UN has promoted itself to uselessness...

if congress is looking for places to cut from the budget, UN funding would be first on my list.

bam, 4 billion dollars saved.
 
LOL

I hope they police it as effectively as they police the real world. AKA business as usual, write whiny diatribes ("UN Resolutions") and back them up with nothing, maybe occasionally get in the way for a while.
 
LOL

I hope they police it as effectively as they police the real world. AKA business as usual, write whiny diatribes ("UN Resolutions") and back them up with nothing, maybe occasionally get in the way for a while.

yeah, but they want to control the standards.

which means all the progress will come to a screeching halt.

Standards are best left to industry and the engineers, not appointed politicians.
 
Until now, the work of the UN negotiators who are pondering how to regulate the Internet has been shrouded in secrecy. But as 1,950 delegates from 193 countries gathered in Dubai to consider 900 proposals to regulate the Internet, their game became clear.

The Russian-educated head of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the UN body seeking to control the Internet, Dr. Hamadoun Toure says: "The brutal truth is that the internet remains largely [the] rich world's privilege." He adds that "the ITU wants to change that."

Here's how:
The ITU wants to force companies -- and eventually their users (us) -- to pay for streaming video. The proposal is called "pay to stream" or "a quality based model." According to the BBC, "This would see firms face charges if they wanted to ensure streamed video and other quality-critical content download without the risk of problems such as jerky images." Presumably the revenues from this Internet Tax would go to building up Net infrastructure in the less developed world. And, undoubtedly, the cost will be passed onto the users throughout the world -- including you!

But building up the Net's third world infrastructure is not the real agenda here. It's a facade.

Russia and China want firms like Google to have to pay to send streaming video into other countries, creating a charge that can be passed on to the users. The idea is to make it so expensive that nobody in their totalitarian countries downloads anything they shouldn't which might open their eyes to the truth Moscow and Beijing want to keep out.

The ITU is now charged with regulating long distance phone services. But Moscow and Beijing want to expand its power to dictate to the Internet and they have a willing tool in Toure who was educated in Leningrad and Moscow in the pre-glasnost era.

The delegates and would-be regulators have until December 14th to agree on which proposals to adopt. Russia and China are seeking a declaration that each nation has an "equal right to manage the Internet" to enhance its ability to block politically free sites.

Fortunately, the European Union's digital agenda commissioner Neelie Kroes has tweeted that "the internet works, it doesn't need to be regulated by ITR Treaty." And Vinton Cerf, the computer scientist who co-designed some of the Internet's core underlying protocols, says "a state-controlled system of regulation is not only unnecessary, it would almost invariable raise costs and prices and interfere with the rapid and organic growth of the internet."

Cerf notes that "only governments have a voice at the ITU...engineers, companies, and the people that build and use the web have no vote."

And so it would be if these talks lead to a new treaty, only governments will run the Net. God help us all!

(NONE of this is being covered by American media, whether cable, broadcast, or print).

Update
Thankfully, the UN negotiations on Internet regulation collapsed in Dubai when the U.S. and Canada announced that they would refuse to support or sign any treaty that gave the UN's International Telecommunications Union (ITU) the power to regulate the Internet.

They specifically rejected the efforts of Vladimir Putin's Russia to control the Internet through international treaty. Russia had sought to give each country the power to manage the Internet within their own countries and Putin's ally Toure, the head of the ITU, sought to charge Google and other content sites for any videos used internationally. The goal in these charges was to make it prohibitively expensive for Russians to download video from foreign providers.

Russia had obtained support from a strong majority of world governments because each found it in their interest to suppress the Internet at home. Our hope was that the U.S. would block the treaty and it did!
 
On the one hand, I do kinda like the "pay to stream" idea - I'm sick of having to watch the news online. If I wanted to actually watch news, I'd figure out how to turn on the damned TV.

And YouTube videos, for some reason - the idea just makes me itch.

But the idea as censorship? No. Censorship should, at most, be practised at the individual and household level. No one adult (or group of adults) should be given authority to decide what any other adult (or group of adults) can legally watch, listen to, or read.

That way lies intellectual stagnation of the race, and control of thought. Neither of which I approve.
 
Back
Top