{"id":25015,"date":"2013-02-12T22:00:36","date_gmt":"2013-02-13T03:00:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rbach.net\/blog\/index.php\/"},"modified":"2022-08-25T12:59:32","modified_gmt":"2022-08-25T16:59:32","slug":"battle-lines-being-drawn-for-the-next-itu-conference","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rbach.net\/index.php\/battle-lines-being-drawn-for-the-next-itu-conference\/","title":{"rendered":"UN Tries to Control the Internet Again"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"UN<\/a>InfoSecurity<\/em> reports<\/a> that even after much of the free world refused to sign the controversial new ITU<\/a> WCIT-12 treaty in December 2012, U.S. Many argued this would give the UN control of the Internet. Federal Communications Commission (FCC)<\/a> Commissioner Robert M. McDowell<\/a> warned<\/a>, \u2018the worst is yet to come.\u2019<\/p>\n

\"ITU<\/a>\u201cThe United States<\/em>,\u201d he said, \u201cshould immediately prepare for an even more treacherous ITU treaty negotiation<\/strong> that will take place in 2014 in Korea<\/a>. Those talks could expand the ITU\u2019s reach even further.<\/em>\u201d McDowell seems convinced that the\u00a0ITU’s desire to control the internet<\/strong> is not a passing fancy, but a long-term intent. He may be right, and it may come before 2014.<\/p>\n

Last week the ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Tour\u00e9<\/a> released his draft report for the Fifth World Telecommunication\/Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum 2013. \u201cThis draft report of the Secretary-General to the WTPF-2013<\/a>,<\/em>\u201d it states, \u201caims to provide a basis for discussion at the Policy Forum, incorporating the contributions of ITU Member States and Sector Members, and serving as the sole working document of the Forum focusing on key issues on which it would be desirable to reach conclusions.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n

\"ITU\u2019s<\/a>Suggested themes for discussion include, \u201cGlobal Principles for the governance and use of the Internet,\u201d and \u201cOn the basis of reciprocity, to explore ways for greater collaboration and co\u00f6rdination between ITU and relevant organizations \u2013 including, but not limited to, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers<\/a> (ICANN), the Regional Internet Registries<\/a> (RIRs), the Internet Engineering Task Force<\/a> (IETF), the Internet Society<\/a> (ISOC) and the World Wide Web Consortium<\/a> (W3C) \u2013 involved in the development of IP-based networks and the future internet, through cooperation agreements, as appropriate, to increase the role of ITU in Internet governance to ensure the largest benefits to the global community.\u201d<\/p>\n

This is exactly what caused disarray in December\u2019s WCIT in Dubai the commissioner states.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, a \u2018de-fund the ITU petition<\/a><\/strong> has appeared on the White House<\/a> \u2018We the People<\/a>\u2019 website. A supporting website gives full details. \u201cFighting on behalf of the Internet,\u201d it states, The United States government and fifty-four other countries rejected the ITU\u2019s takeover attempt<\/strong>, but this is a single battle in a war that the ITU will continue to fight. The ITU is spending more than $180M\/year to oppose the Internet and is drawing from its reserves more heavily each year ($9M in 2010, up from $5.5M in 2009), as progressive countries withdraw their payments from the ITU\u2019s war-chest.<\/p>\n

The ten most oppressive countries<\/strong> in the Open Net Initiative’s ranking of online freedom all sided against the internet<\/strong>, and none of them are giving the ITU as much as the U.S. is. If all the countries that stood with the Internet against the ITU\u2019s attack withdraw their funding, it claims, \u201cthe ITU\u2019s membership revenue will be reduced by 74%.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>The petition also calls for future U.S. delegations to be reduced \u201cto no more than one USG representative, tasked primarily with communicating a U.S. position that the ITU\u2019s only legitimate area of authority is radio communications.<\/em>\u201d The long-term danger from such entrenched views on both sides is that the worldwide nature of the internet might fracture into one internet under multi-stakeholder governance in the \u2018free\u2019 world, and a series of heavily government-regulated Internets elsewhere.<\/p>\n

\u201cFreedom and prosperity are at stake,<\/em><\/strong>\u201d warned Commissioner McDowell.<\/p>\n

rb-<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

I have warned about the United Nations’ attempt to take over the Internet since November<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

Related article<\/h6>\n