U.S. to give up control of the Internet

[green73]

USA GIVES UP CONTROL OF NET; NEW GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

U.S. officials announced plans Friday to relinquish federal government control over the administration of the Internet, a move that pleased international critics but alarmed some business leaders and others who rely on the smooth functioning of the Web.

Pressure to let go of the final vestiges of U.S. authority over the system of Web addresses and domain names that organize the Internet has been building for more than a decade and was supercharged by the backlash to revelations about National Security Agency surveillance last year.

The looming change — if successfully executed — would end the long-running contract between the U.S. Commerce Department and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a California-based non-profit group that goes by the acronym ICANN. That contract is due to expire next year but could be extended if the transition plan is not complete.

“We look forward to ICANN convening stakeholders across the global Internet community to craft an appropriate transition plan.,” said Lawrence E. Strickling, assistant secretary of commerce for communications and information, in a statement.

The announcement set off a passionate response, with some groups quickly embracing the change and others blasting it.

Sen. John D. Rockefeller (D-WVa.), chairman of the commerce community, called the move in a statement: “consistent with other efforts the U.S. and our allies are making to promote a free and open Internet, and to preserve and advance the current multi-stakeholder model of global Internet governance.”

But former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tweeted, “What is the global internet community that Obama wants to turn the internet over to? This risks foreign dictatorships defining the internet.”

cont.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...799_print.html

FLASHBACK:
Rockefeller: Would it be better if we never created the internet?

[Zippyjuan]

Not control over the entire internet- just the control over the list of websites and domains.

[Mini-Me]

I can't really tell whether this is a good thing or a bad thing. I guess it all depends on what ICANN does from here on out, but the nice thing is that ICANN's real power rests mostly on the consensus of Internet users rather than fiat and force. If they ever really got out of hand, "we the people" would just stop recognizing their authority and implement a new decentralized way to register and assign domain names (and DNS servers, etc.). The migration would be painful, but we'd do it if necessary...after all, we've already done this with .onion links (Tor network) and .i2p links (I2P network).

[Dianne]

There is no USA

Only hope the former USA has, is to impeach that bastard in the White House and impeach 90% of the Congress... all guilty of high crimes, tyranny, drug addiction.

Outside of that, the United States is gone ... done ...

[Dianne]

USA GIVES UP CONTROL OF NET; NEW GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

cont.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...799_print.html

FLASHBACK:
Rockefeller: Would it be better if we never created the internet?

The world is great with the internet... the world is not so great with that Rockefeller bastard...
Thank god, he is leaving us ... Although the fruit of his criminal loins will haunt us for more generations to come ..

[VoluntaryAmerican]

Lol. It would be better if we didn't create the internet? Are you $#@!ing kidding me.
Maybe better for the central government tyrants of the world, about it.

[tangent4ronpaul]

The DNS servers are an effective "off" switch so I guess it's good that no one country has control over it.

I'm wondering if the US gvmt will still be able to seize domains and thus take them offline, as they like to do sometimes. I'm guessing they will still be able to do this.

-t

[MRK]

Not control over the entire internet- just the control over the list of websites and domains.

Pretty much the same thing at this point. Although this will change in the future.

I'm actually not looking forward to a time when some international court can seize or shutter domains with DMCA-like notices. Just one step further for the inescapable international law matrix.

[ClydeCoulter]

Concerning the Rockefeller video, his gripe was that critical systems are on the internet. I agree that, that particular usage of the internet was not very well thought out. I have always smh'd about it.

Why in the hell would computers, connected to anything important, be also connected to the internet? Stuxnet should have been less of a problem for centrifuges than a cockroach in the lab. The same for any other critical system.

I don't even connect my computer that I use to control my CNC machine to the internet.

edit: Where are the responsible and intelligent software and systems architects?

[staerker]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin

[Mini-Me]

Concerning the Rockefeller video, his gripe was that critical systems are on the internet. I agree that, that particular usage of the internet was not very well thought out. I have always smh'd about it.

Why in the hell would computers, connected to anything important, be also connected to the internet? Stuxnet should have been less of a problem for centrifuges than a cockroach in the lab. The same for any other critical system.

I don't even connect my computer that I use to control my CNC machine to the internet.

edit: Where are the responsible and intelligent software and systems architects?

As far as I know the Iranian scientists didn't actually connect their critical computers to the Internet, but Stuxnet was coded cleverly enough that they didn't have to be: From my understanding it infected external media like USB thumb drives, which then infected other computers they were used on (I'm not sure if this came from exploiting autorun functionality or what though). Over time, this allowed it to infect even systems without a realtime connection to the Internet. I haven't read up on it in years though, so I don't remember the details.

[DamianTV]

The Internet will no longer be protected by Free Speech, not that it was when it was under the control of the US Govt anyway. Eventually, as soon as any one says something objectionable on the internet, the domain will be seized and shut down. Either way, US retaining control or giving it up, Free Speech is at extreme risk of being crushed.

[Occam's Banana]

But former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tweeted, “What is the global internet community that Obama wants to turn the internet over to? This risks foreign dictatorships defining the internet.”

What - as opposed to domestic dictatorship defining the Internet?

I'm no expert on ICANN and how the Internet works, but I know enough. Gingrich is full of $#@!.

ICANN does not have any guns - and even if it did, they would be no good in policing or controlling what is essentially software.

[Origanalist]

Republicans weigh in against Internet globalization
by JOHN HAYWARD 17 Mar 2014, 8:54 AM PDT

It looks like at least some Republicans are planning to make hay over Friday night's surprise "document dump" announcement that American authority over Internet domain registration would be handed off to some as-yet nonexistent global body. Politico notes that while a few prominent Republicans, such as Senators Marco Rubio and ranking Commerce Committee member John Thune, are currently non-committal or guardedly optimistic, others have swiftly become critical of the plan, and plan to make it a campaign issue:

“While I certainly agree our nation must stridently review our procedures regarding surveillance in light of the NSA controversy, to put ourselves in a situation where censorship-laden governments like China or Russia could take a firm hold on the Internet itself is truly a scary thought,” Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said. “I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Senate Commerce Committee and with the Commerce Department on this, because — to be blunt — the ‘global internet community’ this would empower has no First Amendment.”

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, minutes after the Friday announcement, tweeted: “Every American should worry about Obama giving up control of the Internet to an undefined group. This is very, very dangerous.”
And that’s just a start.

“This is red meat for the base,” said former Rep. Mary Bono (R-Calif.), who sponsored a resolution in 2012 aimed at keeping the Internet free of governmental control. “We’re at a critical time where [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is proving he is capable of outmaneuvering the administration. … As they digest it, I think people are going to be very upset.”

cont....http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2...-globalization