Keep the U.N. out of .com

Keep the U.N. out of .com
: What I feared about U.N. involvement in the Internet is already coming to pass:

Paul Twomey, the president of the Internet’s semi-official governing body, Icann, learned Friday night what it feels like to be an outsider.

Mr. Twomey, who had flown 20 hours from Vietnam to Geneva to observe a preparatory meeting for this week’s United Nations’ conference on Internet issues, ended up being escorted from the meeting room by guards. The officials running the meeting had suddenly decided to exclude outside observers.

Mr. Twomey’s ejection may underscore the resentment of many members of the international community over the way the Internet is run and over United States ownership of many important Internet resources.

Well, tough noogies!

: Instead of worrying about America and the Internet — since we made it happen, after all — maybe the U.N. should worry instead about Iran censoring the Internet. No, instead, while they were ejecting a representative of an American company, the U.N. invited in a huge delegation of officials from Iran — the same officials who are censoring the Internet.

Yes, the U.N. would be a fine organization to run the technology future of the world.

No f’ing way! They should pry the Internet out of our dead American hands.

35 responses to “Keep the U.N. out of .com”

  1. Average Joe Avatar
    Average Joe

    Maybe Europe can come up with its own network called ResentNet.

  2. Scott Avatar

    Yeah, why don’t we give them the teevee, radios, telephones and newspapers while we’re at it.
    Really, what would really happen would be that an alternate un-UN controlled internet would arise.

  3. Scot Avatar

    Sorry to double-post, but what conceivable reason does that UN aparatchik have for throwing out the public? For the internet!

  4. Greg Avatar

    But guys! We’re missing our one chance to screw up the information highway for the forseeable future! How can we pass this offer up?

  5. Donnah Avatar

    Go, Jeff!

  6. Thomas Avatar

    In college I was a member of Model UN and thought the UN was in general a decent idea. But the older I get the more I can’t help but wonder what the hell they are thinking? They don’t understand it but are all to quick to regulate it.
    Jeff you ought to try to have a blogger education session at the UN sometime, it’s just up the street and might help (yes 99% wishful thinking, but I doubt it could hurt any)

  7. Glenn Avatar

    Is there really anything that the UN could do to censor the internet without the cooperation of the US and all the internet cos., ISPs, etc.???

  8. Average Joe Avatar
    Average Joe

    If they touch our routers we should start bombing.

  9. Mara Avatar

    They should pry the Internet out of our dead American hands.
    Don’t give them any ideas.

  10. Dishman Avatar

    The constitution trumps any treaty. The courts seem to have taken a great fondness to the internet as a vehicle for free speech. I believe the end result is that they would throw out almost any treaty that infringed on the internet.

  11. Bryan C Avatar

    Closed to observers? Escorted out by guards? I only wish I were surprised. If there’s any organization that can make ICANN look responsive, evenhanded, and competent, it’s got to be the United Nations.
    I have a feeling that they just don’t understand the technology. Perhaps one of the attendees in the next closed session could arrange a demonstration involving an open mic on their laptop, PDA, or wireless phone. I’m sure the resulting set of MP3s or live streaming audio broadcasts would be informative and enlightening for all concerned.

  12. Andy Freeman Avatar
    Andy Freeman

    > In college I was a member of Model UN and thought the UN was in general a decent idea.
    A Model UN with college and high school students playing at govt is a much better idea than the actual UN.
    Does anyone know what they expect to accomplish?
    They’re not going to get a US court to enforce censorship of US web pages. No US ISP will agree to charge users for e-mail.
    They might be able to tax on-lines sales that cross US borders, but that will just put their companies at a disadvantage.
    They forget that their only real power is to refuse to connect to us, which isn’t much of power as we can do without them much easier than they can do without us. Heck – if they cut e-mail from Nigeria, I’ll be happy.

  13. IceCold Avatar

    Great post and some good comments. This issue puts things in stark relief. The old, well-intentioned but now moribund and corrupted US invention — the dictators’ and free-riders’ club known as the UN — vs. the new, sprawling, quirky, revolutionary and freedom-promoting US invention — the internet. The US should not just squelch this slimy effort by the dictators’ club, we should relentlessly push internet freedom as a new weapon against closed societies and gang-governments. No down-side.

  14. philip Avatar

    Ah yes, the Transnational Progressives are at it again; yet another attempt (Kyoto, ICC, etc) to force the evil, capitalist, American rogue state to subordinate itself to superior, enlightened rulers.

  15. MommaBear Avatar

    “Quick & Dirty” solution: any country representative that supported that ejection of the observer should be cause to deny access of any kind by anyone from that country to any of our U.S. Internet systems for 24 hours. After the screaming in that country quieted down, perhaps the attitude there might change a bit. Imaging what that would do to economic activity in that country!

  16. Pele Avatar

    “They should pry the Internet out of our dead American hands.”
    Now that’s just stupid isn’t it. Methinks you are being a bit too “I am pro-American” here Jeff. I personnaly think it would be a mistake if a governmental body were to take on a regulatory role but there are issues, including accountabilty and funding, that need to be addressed.
    Anyway I’m more worried about US government involement than UN.

  17. Richard Cook Avatar
    Richard Cook

    Pele
    “Anyway I’m more worried about US government involement than UN.” That is an astoudingly ignorant comment. I would rather have any regulation (and you know any government will try) guided by the U.S. Constitution. If you want to see an example of what the U.N. would do the EU proposed constitution would be a good start. To most countries around the world a constitition is a piece of paper that can be changed at will to suite those in power. At least here there is a multi branch process that, and this is the important part, is respected by the populace and the politicians. It actually means something to us.

  18. Richard Cook Avatar
    Richard Cook

    Should be “astoundingly…..”

  19. Mitch H. Avatar

    A Model UN with college and high school students playing at govt is a much better idea than the actual UN.

    I don’t know. My high school’s Model UN was kind of ferocious. I think we ended up nuking Pakistan…

  20. Pixy Misa Avatar

    Mitch – you say that like it’s a bad thing.
    Anyway, how the heck is the U.N. supposed to take over the internet?
    U.N.: Right, we control the internet now.
    ISPs: You what?
    UN: We control the internet.
    I: Yeah, whatever.
    UN: We want a ten-cent tax on all emails, starting yesterday.
    I: A what? You’re kidding, right?
    UN: If you do not comply, we will pass a resolution condemning you.
    I: Really?
    UN: You wouldn’t like to be condmened.
    I: Pete, is that you? Man, you had me going for a minute!
    Pete: No, check the headers. They’re for real.
    I: Good grief.
    I: Well, oddly enough, we stopped using email last week.
    UN: What?
    I: Yes, we only support email now for compatibility with particularly technologically backwards organizations.
    UN: What?
    I: We use xmail now. Everyone in the world uses xmail.
    UN: Well, we want a ten-cent tax on all xmails, then.
    I: But xmails don’t use the internet. You have no jurisdiction.
    UN: What?
    I: They use the extranet.
    UN: What’s that?
    I: It’s what we replaced the internet with when you took it over.

  21. Andy Freeman Avatar
    Andy Freeman

    > there are issues, including accountabilty and funding
    Accountability to whom and for what? Funding for what?
    Do “Accountability and funding” mean “paying for bandwidth/network services” or “subsidize Nigerian spam and let some French judge decide that you libelled someone”.
    I note that the former already exists and the latter is bad.
    It may not be a good thing that anyone can post any fool thing they want, but it’s better than all of the alternatives.

  22. cardeblu Avatar

    An excerpt from Neal Boortz
    —“And just how does the UN feel about things such as freedom of speech and freedom of expression? Just read the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Sure, right there in Article 19 it says that “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.” It also says that everyone has the right “to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” That sounds pretty good, doesn’t it? Even if the UN did control the Internet we would be assured of our freedom to seek, receive and impart information, right?
    Not so fast. You need to read a little further. Just read Article 29 Section 3. Here, I’ll print it for you:
    “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”
    Do you need me to translate? This section says that your freedom of speech, your freedom of expression, and your freedom to “seek, receive and impart information” cannot be exercised if you would interfere with the “purposes and principles of the United Nations,” whatever those are.” —
    (He goes on to state that his site could be considered to be “hate speech” according to the UN.)

  23. Jack Tanner Avatar
    Jack Tanner

    Andy – the issues with “Accountability and funding” that Pele refers too are lack of infinite US funding without any expectation of accountability. These were published in Saddam’s book ‘How to Become a Billionaire Off of UN Programs’.

  24. Wes Avatar

    Seriously Pele, not to bash you, but what are the issues of accountability & financing?

  25. Pele Avatar

    Richard Cook: Excuse my ‘astouding’ ignorance but there are some who think the United States Department of Commerce’s use of ICANN to run the DNS violates the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and/or the US Constitution.

  26. rosignol Avatar

    Pele: So set up your own root DNS servers, nobody’s forcing you to use ours. Keep in mind that interoperability is *your* problem.

  27. AK Avatar

    Pele, methinks you should take a look back at your own post before you sneer at anyone else’s typos.

  28. DJPersia Avatar

    Thomas – ahh yes, Model UN – another way HighSchools are being used to indoctrinate I mean brainwash I mean f*** up the youth of the nation.. Bastards!

  29. Andy Freeman Avatar
    Andy Freeman

    > Richard Cook: Excuse my ‘astouding’ ignorance but there are some who think the United States Department of Commerce’s use of ICANN to run the DNS violates the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and/or the US Constitution.
    Either you’ve got an argument, or you’re just flapping. Please cite the relevant provision(s) of the US Constitution.

  30. Richard Cook Avatar
    Richard Cook

    Pele
    I’m begining to think I was charitable using the phrase “astounding ignorance”.

  31. Pele Avatar

    It could be argued that ICANN is not a private entity, but a camouflaged government entity created by agreement between the US State Department and similar agencies of other governments. Camouflaged government entities are in violation of the need for citizen oversight of government.

  32. capt joe Avatar

    Pele,
    ooh, aah! “deep dark conspiracies” ™ between the evil corporate world and the nefarious US government.
    You forgot the illuminati and the bilderberg group. I think they would have the final say on the content of the DNS entries. God! Do you actually believe their is conspiracy around DNS servers. jeeez.
    Come on, the UN is doing this because a bunch of fascist countries, like say … IRAN are freaking out because they can’t control the flow of “truth”. Something you “progressives” talk about a lot (but that’s all you do).

  33. Pele Avatar

    Due process – A term of US law which refers to fundamental procedural legal safeguards of which every citizen has an absolute right when a state or court purports to take a decision that could affect any right of that citizen. The most basic right protected under the due process doctrine is the right to be given notice, and an opportunity to be heard. The term is now also in use in other countries, again to refer to basic fundamantal legal rights such as the right to be heard.

  34. JorgXMcKie Avatar
    JorgXMcKie

    I’m not sure what Pele is talking about in that last bit, but his understanding of due process is pretty shaky. There are two kinds of due process, procedural and substantive. Pele sounds like the sort who uses one to trump the other in whatever order favors his position.
    Due process is an absolute right only in the sense that one can always raise it as a violation of rights. It gets denied at least as often as it gets supported.
    As far as a “camouflaged” segment of government goes, how camouflaged can it be if he discerns it so easily. This question, by the way, could be easily answered by a law suit. It would undoubtedly get slapped down forthwith.
    Finally, if I were all of you, I wouldn’t depend on SCOTUS to protect the net. Given Justice O’Connor’s latest remarks about basing decisions on “international law” I’m more than a bit queasy about the protect the Court is likely to give us. They are, after all, a part of the political elite that at least desires approbation from abroad.