Internet Stability, Security Must Be Maintained, U.S. Says- U.S. Department Of State
The managment and governance of the Internet is again becoming a not insignificant international issue.
There is considerable pressure from some countries for that entire issue to be taken over by some multilateral international body. After all, mail issues are coordinated by the International Postal Union (IPU), and telephone and telegraphd dito by the International Telephone and Telegraphy Union (ITU), the one in Berne and the other in Geneva.
Many of the corresponding issues for the Internet are however dealt with by the non-governmental ICANN organisation, headquartered in California and operating under US laws. In the background howevers a certain role of the US government, reflecting a part of the history of the origin of the system.
Now, a UN panel has issued a report with a series of alternatives for the future, and the US government has issued its position in a rather extensive paper.
In essence, the US position comes down more in favour of the ICANN than of the ITU.
I have a fair amount of experience of both UN organisations and of ICANN, and I have to say that I see much greater flexibility and transparence of these issues remain with ICANN than if they disappear in a gigantic office building and multilateral organisation in Geneva.
The issue is important. Those that take an interest in the future of the Internet and what it represent should take an interest and try to influence the outcome.
augusti 16, 2005 kl. 8:56 pm
The mullas´ Choran gives no legal space for free speech, so either there will be no free speech or no mullas.
augusti 17, 2005 kl. 5:59 pm
Blogbluddle: And this relates how exactly to the news? For those of us who have kept up with the debate and can read between the lines it is of course possible to guess, but still, you constant fear-mongering is a little tiresome.
What is your take on this? Will ICANN move to Iran or what is wrong with you? I hope you’re not suggesting we have free speech in Sweden or indeed the US. Methods may differ and be more or less sophisticated, but unpopular truths are always obscured. By the elites, whether they be Mullahs or Presidents. Given that more than likely conclusion, an international body is preferable. The Mullahs may sit on the board but they’ll never be able to hijack events. Your fear-mongering does not become a cultivated friend of civil discourse.
augusti 17, 2005 kl. 6:37 pm
Our Swedish mullas should never be invited to sit at that table mastering other nations, obscuring democracy and thus contributing to the Islamic way of thinking, I think.