The Letter That Won US Internet Control 576
K-boy writes "Pushing my own scoop, but I think it's a valuable piece of Net history, I have come into possession of the vital letter sent by Condoleezza Rice to the EU over Internet governance. And posted it on the Web.
The letter is pretty stern but you should also read it bearing in mind that letters of this type are not only very rare but they are always written in very, very soft diplomatic language. This was not.
The result of the letter was that the EU dropped its plan for an inter-governmental oversight body for the Internet and we have ended up with the status quo (ICANN, US government control).
The letter was never meant for publication."
How! (Score:5, Interesting)
why fix whats not broken (Score:4, Interesting)
underwhelming (Score:5, Interesting)
There are a lot of folks here with a wide range of experience. Someone please explain to me why I should think this is a big deal.
Question for experts? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How! (Score:2, Interesting)
perhaps the failure of XXX was other than puritan (Score:2, Interesting)
what if someone has MUFFDIVER.COM and someone else has MUFFDIVE.NET.
My guess? the government took a good long look at the first amendment, and other legal issues, and realized, it would not solve any problem, and perhaps, a court case would arise (which they realize they would have to lose) embarrisingly enough.
Maybe that same case would open up a whole 'nuther mess of worms that would not be something they would have to face.
Stern letter? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How! (Score:5, Interesting)
Honourable? (Score:4, Interesting)
Out of curosity, since when would an American English user use the British English spelling?
Also, would an "official diplomatic entity allow" a raw typo like:
"growth and adaptation , based on" (extra space)
Sure, it could be a typo by the editor, this is The Register ® , of course.
Question: Did the US Save the Net from the ITU? (Score:5, Interesting)
The Register is a very opinionated publication, and this article, like most, is heavily laden with emotional bias and innuendo. I have no problem with that, per se, but I am confused because K-boy's articles from the Tunis conference seemed to be contradictory.
I recall one article which quoted the head of the ITU bragging that -- because of EC support? -- the ITU (the international consortium of telephone companies and nationalized telephone utilities) would control the Internet within five years. K-boy, the Register reporter, was appropriately horrified at that prospect, and pointed out that ITU controls in the past would have quashed the Internet, simply never let it be born.
Now, however, in his article about Rice's forceful US defense of the status quo, the same reporter seems again disturbed (if perhaps less than horrified) that the US is not more open to international governmental influences, and is not more willing to adapt Internet control to the likes of the ITU.
So where *do* you stand, K-boy?
Many of us Netcitizens are willing to put up with the imperfections of the current Internet governance -- hoping that strong contractual obligations on an independent administrator will, minimally, guarrantee the ongoing availability of connections -- rather than see control of the Net slide into the hands of greedy, lowest-common-denominator, trans-national bureaucrats, of which the ITU is a preeminent example.
Didn't Condi's letter and the US lobbying campaign save us from the ITU, a fate worst than (or perhaps equivalent to) death for the Internet as we know it?
One thing Rice's letter suggested to me was the advantage of the home-town team, the established owner and manager, over uppity rebels with independent ideas. The same thing, I fear, would be true of the advantage the ITU regulators would have over disorganized international libertarians, if the US were to declare the Net's infrastructure to be up for grabs. If Internet governance -- which may only today be an oximoron -- were to slide into the international political arena, wouldn't it only be a matter of time before Real Control would be seized by the organization with the best financing, technical savvy, and skills at political infighting?
The current ITU president obviously thinks that it is a foregone conclusion that the ITU would be that organization. Anyone want to predict the future of the Net that would follow?
What does the history of the ITU tell us about the prospects for future innovation and disruptive change in an Internet controlled by the ITU?
Just because the US government is a proponent of a position does not mean that it is wrong.
Ms.Rice (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:just another soft-diplomatic letter to me (Score:1, Interesting)
I'm an american living abroad and let me tell you, these people are more likely to speak their mind than most in the states. The only way that comment is wrong is if you're from the hood.
Ever see Duce Bigalow European Jig? There are comments about Americans in there all over. While the Dutch are usually friendly to us, other countries or people can be like just like that. It all depends on where you are and how much you're sticking out. There is a reason the military really harps on us to keep a low profile.
Besides the American comments, these people don't have comfort zones around them like we do, they don't have a problem watching you for a hour or more and they sure as hell don't have a problem speaking their mind.
Now, by either standard, I thought that the leter was mild as well. The only thing it really got across was that the internat was very important to the US and, oh yea, the European Union & the rest of the world...
Re:FUCK THAT! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:how is this flamebait? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:just another soft-diplomatic letter to me (Score:2, Interesting)
Generally, we say what we mean and we don't disguise it in a bunch of niceties or doublespeak.
Interestingly, we Europeans have always had the opposite impression. An example: why is the first thing an American asks if he meets you "how are you" if he expects this question to be answered by "fine" or even some superlative of "fine" instead of the plain truth?
Actually, the fact that American people don't say what they think is one of the points that is mentioned most as a reason for returning from a well-paid job in the US.
SebastianRe:Encouraging IPv6, not hoarding IPv4 (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Kick ass, Condi! (Score:3, Interesting)
Invented? Hardly. It's just a packet switched network, a concept which was old by the time the first RFC was written. If you really think about it, what made the Internet popular was the world wide web, which was invented in the UK.
Re:It's hardly control (Score:5, Interesting)
The reality is that the internet governace is driven bottom-up rather than top-down. The thing that got ICANN off its' ass and open up more gTLDs wasn't the dept. of Comm's influence rather it was offerings from openNIC and others; of course they'd never admit that because it's important to keep up appearences after all.
Re:how is this flamebait? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:just another soft-diplomatic letter to me (Score:2, Interesting)
It's about 'settling in' to a conversation. Irish people tend to speak to each other for a minute or so (usually asking each other how they are, talking about the weather etc.) before launching into what they actually want to speak to each other about.