Print 13 comment(s) - last by inperfectdarkn.. on Apr 24 at 5:32 AM

The confusion of net neutrality will be an issue that multiple nations try to clearly identify during a two-day meeting later this week.

During the Net Mundial, a two-day meeting among international governments and companies, there will be a spirited debate about who controls the internet. 
Last month, the U.S. Commerce Department confirmed it would give up the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), so an international effort will be necessary to help issue Web domains and URLs. 
Moving forward, the U.S. government would like to see a “multi-stakeholder” system in which multiple governments, private sector representatives, and universities to step up and lend a hand.
Some countries, including China and Russia, want to see the United Nations have more control over ICANN, though exact responsibilities and details will need to be hashed out.  It’s a complicated matter because some foreign supporters believe the United States should keep control, however, that’s something the Commerce Department doesn’t want.
There is a growing debate on which governments or parties should “control” the internet, and it seems like no one is able to get along.  However, the argument of net neutrality will also be fiercely discussed, as nations continue to develop cyberwarfare weapons capable of attacking critical infrastructure of political rivals and enemies. 
Regardless of what happens, all parties hope to find legitimate action items that are achievable – not written fluff that will only complicate things further.  The meetings and “outcomes of NETmundial must be concrete and actionable, with clear milestones with a realistic but ambitious timeline,” said Neelie Kroes, European Commission vice president, in an open letter published last week.
During the conference, the National Security Agency’s sophisticated mass surveillance program also will be discussed – former NSA contractor Edward Snowden’s disclosure of surveillance and spying has created distrust among the U.S. and British governments – with representatives keen to discuss privacy efforts.

Source: Wall Street Journal

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Why Private Sector?
By drlumen on 4/22/2014 2:43:55 PM , Rating: 1
The private sector should have absolutely zero say in the stewardship of ICANN.

I wonder what private sector companies they have in mind. Perhaps TWC/Comcast, AT&T, Apple? Of course, none of those would have a conflicting interest. :p

RE: Why Private Sector?
By amanojaku on 4/22/14, Rating: 0
RE: Why Private Sector?
By hpglow on 4/22/14, Rating: 0
RE: Why Private Sector?
By superPC on 4/22/2014 4:23:02 PM , Rating: 2
But right now government are the only entity that can issue a land deed or land usage rights. How is that any different from what ICANN is doing right now (albeit in cyberspace)? I think only government should be involved (but not just the US).

RE: Why Private Sector?
By BladeVenom on 4/22/2014 5:26:37 PM , Rating: 2
I think a closer analogy would be my telephone company being able to issue me a phone number.

RE: Why Private Sector?
By Etsp on 4/22/2014 5:34:47 PM , Rating: 3
I think a closer analogy would be where your company gets the list of numbers it can issue to its customers, and what restrictions there are on them...

RE: Why Private Sector?
By JediJeb on 4/22/2014 4:02:05 PM , Rating: 5
The private sector should have absolutely zero say in the stewardship of ICANN.

Just think, if China becomes in charge of the internet we won't need to implement IPv6 because they will shutdown so many internet connections we won't need that many IP addresses to service the web.

RE: Why Private Sector?
By Nightbird321 on 4/22/2014 5:01:41 PM , Rating: 3
That and the private sector has say in all government sectors anyways through political donations

RE: Why Private Sector?
By Jeffk464 on 4/23/2014 6:36:17 PM , Rating: 2
There is a growing debate on which governments or parties should “control” the internet

I go with not any, but a mix of all. Of course as it goes international I think it gets harder and harder to stop corporations from trying to turn it into a monopoly.

The UN? Now thats a BIG mistake IMO.
By GotThumbs on 4/23/2014 12:40:17 PM , Rating: 3
Todate, the UN has been an epic failure at addressing issues appropriatly.

Letting IRAN be a key player in the United Nations Human Rights Council.

The US foots the largest part of the bill funding the UN and the UN's costs are at the level of abuse IMO.

RE: The UN? Now thats a BIG mistake IMO.
By PrinceGaz on 4/23/2014 2:03:40 PM , Rating: 2
The UN is the only recognised representative worldwide organisation we have, so it is the best option for sorting things out.

Of course the main problem with the UN is that certain countries (the five established nuclear weapon owning countries, including my home country the UK) have the right of veto which means many resolutions which should be passed are not. This happens both sides of the Atlantic, with Russia and China blocking resolutions against countries they are friendly with, and the US frequently doing the same for a country it is friendely with.

Unless someone can come up with something better than the UN, I'd rather entrust them with governing the interwebs than any single nation or any private corporation (or group of corporations).

By Jeffk464 on 4/23/2014 6:40:09 PM , Rating: 2
US frequently doing the same for a country it is friendely with

Oh come on we all know you are saying Israel without saying Israel. :)

Anything but the UN
By inperfectdarkness on 4/24/2014 5:32:32 AM , Rating: 2
The UN is utterly worthless as an organization. It would be much better to put ICANN as a not-for-profit organization operating independently and with representatives from participating nations. The Red Cross would do a better job with ICANN than the UN. So would NATO, for crying out loud.

"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki