Biggy
11-15-2005, 09:59 PM
From the WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113206649647197595.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
"TUNIS, Tunisia -- The U.S. fought back complaints by a host of nations at a global summit here and retained oversight of the technical underpinnings of the Internet.
At the same time, the U.S. agreed to create a forum to discuss an array of Internet policy issues. The first such forum will be held in Greece during the first half of next year, U.S. officials say.
But even with that agreement, "There is no change in the status quo" regarding the governing of the Internet, David Gross, a member of the U.S. delegation attending the summit, said last night.
Countries including China, Iran, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Russia lobbied at the first-ever global summit on the Internet, hosted by the United Nations' International Telecommunication Union, for changes to the current arrangement, which gives the Commerce Department sole oversight of determining the technical foundation for how Internet users communicate with one another. Among other matters, the U.S. oversees the creation of domain names and Internet addresses.
With more than a billion people using the Internet, a coalition has emerged around the notion it is unfair and undemocratic for "one country to control the Internet," said Yoshio Utsumi, secretary general of the ITU. Countries like China have been pushing for creation of a U.N.-monitored body to oversee the Internet.
"The Internet is becoming a critical element of our lives," added Abdullah Al-Darrab, the chief negotiator for Saudi Arabia, in an interview. "What's needed are clear policies, and setting them is the right of every government, not just one."
Critics of U.S. domination of the Internet were placated somewhat by the agreement on the creation of the forum open to governments, nongovernmental organizations and the private sector. Still, criticism of the U.S. grip on Internet plumbing is unlikely to dissipate.
U.S. negotiators said opening the process to intergovernmental oversight risks burdening the Internet with bureaucracy and stifling its innovative nature.
Companies "want to make sure they don't have to hire more international lawyers than engineers," said Michael Gallagher, assistant secretary of commerce and a member of the U.S. delegation.
The body that determines domain names, such as .com, .net and .info, is a private California-based nonprofit organization called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. The Commerce Department, through a memorandum of understanding, has retained oversight of Icann since its inception in 1998.
Other countries had believed the U.S. would sever its ties to Icann, making the body independent. But in June Commerce officials released a statement indicating the U.S. wasn't prepared to give up its role any time soon.
The U.S. and officials from countries that mostly agree with its position, including Canada, New Zealand and Australia, worried such a body would be an interim step toward the creation of a formal body with oversight of Icann. A Saudi official acknowledged that their ultimate aim was to replace the U.S. oversight position with an intergovernmental body, though the day-to-day operations of the Internet would remain with Icann.
Paul Twomey, the chief executive officer of Icann and an Australian, has described the intensifying global tussle over the Internet as one between politics and technical engineering. "We have to pick our way through that very carefully so we don't do any real damage to the Internet," he said in a recent interview.
Acknowledging the discontent among other nations, Mr. Twomey has suggested steps to include more government participation in Icann, which has a government advisory committee. The U.S. is the only country with veto power.
Mr. Gallagher, the Commerce official, called the debate a distraction from the Internet's bigger problems, such as spam, security and cyber terrorism. "The role of government is to allow the private sector to come up with solutions to these problems," he said."
"TUNIS, Tunisia -- The U.S. fought back complaints by a host of nations at a global summit here and retained oversight of the technical underpinnings of the Internet.
At the same time, the U.S. agreed to create a forum to discuss an array of Internet policy issues. The first such forum will be held in Greece during the first half of next year, U.S. officials say.
But even with that agreement, "There is no change in the status quo" regarding the governing of the Internet, David Gross, a member of the U.S. delegation attending the summit, said last night.
Countries including China, Iran, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Russia lobbied at the first-ever global summit on the Internet, hosted by the United Nations' International Telecommunication Union, for changes to the current arrangement, which gives the Commerce Department sole oversight of determining the technical foundation for how Internet users communicate with one another. Among other matters, the U.S. oversees the creation of domain names and Internet addresses.
With more than a billion people using the Internet, a coalition has emerged around the notion it is unfair and undemocratic for "one country to control the Internet," said Yoshio Utsumi, secretary general of the ITU. Countries like China have been pushing for creation of a U.N.-monitored body to oversee the Internet.
"The Internet is becoming a critical element of our lives," added Abdullah Al-Darrab, the chief negotiator for Saudi Arabia, in an interview. "What's needed are clear policies, and setting them is the right of every government, not just one."
Critics of U.S. domination of the Internet were placated somewhat by the agreement on the creation of the forum open to governments, nongovernmental organizations and the private sector. Still, criticism of the U.S. grip on Internet plumbing is unlikely to dissipate.
U.S. negotiators said opening the process to intergovernmental oversight risks burdening the Internet with bureaucracy and stifling its innovative nature.
Companies "want to make sure they don't have to hire more international lawyers than engineers," said Michael Gallagher, assistant secretary of commerce and a member of the U.S. delegation.
The body that determines domain names, such as .com, .net and .info, is a private California-based nonprofit organization called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. The Commerce Department, through a memorandum of understanding, has retained oversight of Icann since its inception in 1998.
Other countries had believed the U.S. would sever its ties to Icann, making the body independent. But in June Commerce officials released a statement indicating the U.S. wasn't prepared to give up its role any time soon.
The U.S. and officials from countries that mostly agree with its position, including Canada, New Zealand and Australia, worried such a body would be an interim step toward the creation of a formal body with oversight of Icann. A Saudi official acknowledged that their ultimate aim was to replace the U.S. oversight position with an intergovernmental body, though the day-to-day operations of the Internet would remain with Icann.
Paul Twomey, the chief executive officer of Icann and an Australian, has described the intensifying global tussle over the Internet as one between politics and technical engineering. "We have to pick our way through that very carefully so we don't do any real damage to the Internet," he said in a recent interview.
Acknowledging the discontent among other nations, Mr. Twomey has suggested steps to include more government participation in Icann, which has a government advisory committee. The U.S. is the only country with veto power.
Mr. Gallagher, the Commerce official, called the debate a distraction from the Internet's bigger problems, such as spam, security and cyber terrorism. "The role of government is to allow the private sector to come up with solutions to these problems," he said."