« How the World Turns! | Critical Thinking Skills »
October 09, 2005
Breaking America's Grip on the Internet
Everyone wants a part of a success story. Brazil claims that because it uses the Internet to collect 90% of its tax revenue that it needs part control of Internet. Hmmm. I use Excel to compute my taxes; will Bill Gates give me part control? This is nuts.
Summary of the meetings at the EU in this week's Guardian. Key graphs:
"Old allies in world politics, representatives from the UK and US sat just feet away from each other, but all looked straight ahead as Hendon explained the EU had decided to end the US government's unilateral control of the internet and put in place a new body that would now run this revolutionary communications medium."
"A number of countries represented in Geneva, including Brazil, China, Cuba, Iran and several African states, insisted the US give up control, but it refused. The meeting "was going nowhere", Hendon says, and so the EU took a bold step and proposed two stark changes: a new forum that would decide public policy, and a "cooperation model" comprising governments that would be in overall charge."
China, Cuba, Iran? Controlling the Internet?
According to Milton Mueller, author of Ruling the Root, an overseeing council "could interfere with standards. What would stop it saying 'when you're making this standard for data transfer you have to include some kind of surveillance for law enforcement?'"
"Then there is human rights. China has attracted criticism for filtering content from the net within its borders. Tunisia - host of the World Summit - has also come under attack for silencing online voices. Mueller doesn't see a governmental overseeing council having any impact: 'What human rights groups want is for someone to be able to bring some kind of enforceable claim to stop them violating people's rights. But how's that going to happen? I can't see that a council is going to be able to improve the human rights situation.'"
The Wall Street Journal weighs in with pragmatic implications today with an editorial by Adam Thierer and Wayne Crews:
"The implications for online commerce are profound. The moment one puts up a Web site, one has "gone global"--perhaps even automatically subjected oneself to the laws of every country on the planet."
"A global Internet regulatory state could mean that We Are the World--on speech and libel laws, sales taxes, privacy policies, antitrust statutes and intellectual property. How then would a Web site operator or even a blogger know how to act or do business? Compliance with some 190 legal codes would be confusing, costly and technically possible for all but the most well-heeled firms. The safest option would be to conform online speech or commercial activities to the most restrictive laws to ensure global compliance. If you like the idea of Robert Mugabe setting legal standards for everyone, then WSIS is for you."
Read the whole article. And see Can This Be True, below.
Posted by DavidK at October 9, 2005 09:06 AM | Permalink