What?

U.N. finds Net governance tempting
Last modified: March 25, 2004, 6:57 AM PST
By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com

NEW YORK--A task force that intends to increase the United Nations' involvement with running the Internet is convening here Thursday, its first meeting since VeriSign filed a lawsuit against the group that now oversees domain names and addresses.

The meeting comes as the international body is growing more interested in taking over some of the functions of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and ICANN Chairman Vint Cerf will offer opening remarks.

The United Nations' goal has met with firm opposition from large sectors of the U.S. business community.



"The U.N. tends to be a very slow moving vehicle," Elana Broitman, Register.com's policy director, said in a recent interview. "It's very bureaucratic. Frankly it doesn't give the private sector a seat at the table very often. And so from that perspective, it's highly unlikely we'll see the same kind of innovation and efficiency that we see in ICANN."

The agenda for Thursday's U.N. meeting includes a discussion titled "Accumulated Concerns, Perspectives, and Exploring How We Can Cooperate." Domain names, technical standards, network security, intellectual property, privacy, e-commerce, free speech, taxation, and "cultural and linguistic diversity" also are listed as topics for discussion.

VeriSign's lawsuit, filed last month, lists 43 pages of grievances, alleging that ICANN repeatedly thwarted VeriSign in its attempts to cash in on its master database for .com and .net. VeriSign also accuses ICANN of antitrust violations, a charge that could imperil its ability to continue to operate in its current form.

The United Nations has already made moves to position one of its agencies, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), as a candidate for an ICANN takeover. A recent presentation in Geneva by Tim Kelly, the head of the ITU's strategy and policy unit, made a pitch for the organization to supplant ICANN, at least in part. It touted the strengths of the ITU as neutrality, "international legitimacy, credibility and accountability," and "observance of due process."

In an recent interview, Cerf said he did not see any reason for the United Nations to get more involved "as long as we stay well within the ambit of our responsibilities."

"If VeriSign gets what they want, ICANN becomes irrelevant and you don't have anyone watching the registry operator," Christine Jones, general counsel for domain name registrar Go Daddy, said recently. "The more important player is the U.N. and the ITU, which is trying to gain control."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


How can the U.S. do that, what if they take away like porn and anarchy and all the good stuff.
What will happen to zel to MJ2ds sig, no I this sucks, maybe I read it wrong but if the U.S. is doing it how good could it be?

The feds aren't worthy of my greatness.

Fuck the flag.

Even if anyone gets a tighter grip on the Internet, there's no way in hell they'll be able to stomp out everything they find objectionable. Then again, they might go for the biggest targets which we all know and love.

Personally, I think they should just focus on getting the pedophiles and all such scum and leave the rest alone. But really, there already vigilante groups shutting them down (Something Awful) better than most feds do without spending millions of bucks searching.

In conclusion, they better leave my int4rweb the hell alone.

Good God, if we have to pay taxes for this shit.

There is absolutely no way in hell that they would be able to control the internet. At least I hope not.

Yea, woulnd that be monopolizing and isnt the internet like all over the world, that would cause some huge conflict.

Not only that, but there are also some very talented people around with the computer. They can tighten security all they want, but the feds don't have the capacity to outsmart some of the people on the net. There are always ways around things.

They could simply just make ANOTHER internet using some other connection. Interesting I tell you, the possibilities...

Not only that, but there are also some very talented people around with the computer. They can tighten security all they want, but the feds don't have the capacity to outsmart some of the people on the net. There are always ways around things.

Like an internet war, that would be intresting, elite hackers versus the best of the goverment, sounds like a movie on TBS.

Sadly, the world governments will control everything in a manner of a century or so. Then there will be a world revolt and we'll all die, or become Communists, then die.

Because communism does not work. Look at the red scare.

Because communism does not work. Look at the red scare.

It dosent, but it could.

In a perfect world, maybe. You have to look at it in action as well as theory. As long as we have people greedy for power it's never going to be a good idea for anyone who wants sufficient freedoms.

It would require isolation from the rest of the world, and a leader from there own, but that would be hard.
And some people would oppose it.

Yeah, Uh huh, I think were all gonna die in the upcoming war, CHINA VS. TAIWAN. I think that'll be the end.

What is this, its completely unrelated, communism could work if they were not exposed to the world. God keep the stupid in a jar Gunbound.

A decent article (second part, just under the short "open letter"). It's supposedly from MSNBC, though I couldn't find it directly on their site.. it's from 1997, though, so this issue has been around for a while.

http://www.gtld-mou.org/gtld-discuss...ive/07032.html

A choice quote:

To take care of trademark disputes, the council will have an appeals tribunal known as the "administrative domain name challenge panel." This is seen as a threat to intellectual property and trademarks by Andrew L. Sernovitz, president of the Interactive Media Association and founder of the Open Internet Congress, a group dedicated to thwarting the efforts of the Internet cabal. The panels Òconduct their work in Geneva or via online discussions," Sernovitz says in a document on his group's web site. "You will have no right to a face-to-face defense against your challenger, he says. Further, "During the challenge period, your Internet address can be suspended," Sernovitz says. "If you lose a case - you will have lost your rights forever. There is no appeals process and there is no one to sue.

So if this was in effect during SomethingAwful's dealings with the whole "Kermit Photoshop" thing, SomethingAwful could've been shut down right then and there, without letting them work it out first.

And what if, say, the makers of Kool-Aid decide to shut down Zelaron because of Grav's avatar? I doubt that would happen, unless they were "encouraged" by a disgruntled member or something, but that could instantly shut down Zelaron while the U.N. group look it over, probably never having seen the site before this. They take a look at the flame forum, decide that the site may as well cease to exist, and use the Kool-Aid avatar as an excuse. Unlikely, as it would probably only target "enemies" of the U.N., but who knows?

The Internet is a Weapon of Mass Destruction! That's where Saddam was hiding all of his nukes!! He's got them stockpiled in the Something Awful News Archives! Sue the Internet! Down with www.internet.com!

Shit. There actually is a www.internet.com and it's not nearly as ironic or amusing as I thought it would be. Dammit.

The UN is a bunch of french pussies

The UN is a bunch of french pussies

HA HA HA HA HA HA