Comments on: U.N. proposes changes to Net's operation

Official takes aim at "self-serving justifications" for permitting the U.S. to preserve its unique influence and authority online.

[Seaspray0]

U.N. has no right

History: The internet was created by the US government and over time it grew to include commercial and private activity across the nation. Other countries joined the internet. Today it spans the world and works quite well as it is.
My opinion: THE INTERNET WAS CREATED BY THE US GOVERNMENT. If certain countries do not like how it is being run today, then they can disconnect from the internet and create their own.

[ralfthedog]

Not there own internet, just DNS servers.

I think the system for giving out IP addresses should stay the same. If you have more than one group passing out numbers you will get collisions. Honestly if the UN wants to manage IP6 I would not have that much of a problem with it. Just as long as the United States gets enough IPs.

[qwerty75]

re

Without the European organization CERT, you likely wouldn't be posting here.

The US developed the internet, but it was made useful due to work outside of, and not funded by the US.

[speedys_toy]

are we?

Are we not a soveriegn nation, or are we a stooge nation of the U. N. ?

[Stufiano]

The US chose this

I am tired of you idiots who go around, acting like the UN is some evil organization out to take control of the US.The US is a willing member of the UN. A MEMBER!! Meaning it joined the organization to WORK WITH other countries, not to dictate to them. Sorry to disappoint. And yes, if the US left the UN, it would STILL be functional due to the other member countries with it. Only then there'd be MORE hostility towards the US, for the REASON THE UN WAS CREATED WAS TO ALLOW SMALLER COUNTRIES TO WORK OUT COMPLAINTS AND DISPUTES WITH LARGER COUNTRIES.

Read a book!

[davez2006]

Internet is an American invention

Therefore the Americans should control its assets and other
countries can add value by connecting to it.

The UN is not telling OPEC to hand over its operations and assets,
nor the Diamond cartel.

The world runs better when value received results from value given.

[qwerty75]

Not all of it

The one innovation that propelled the internet from a niche geek tool to a worldwide phenomena is the world wide web, which was invented in Europe.

There are several important protocols created by non-Americans as well.

[JadedGamer]

Automobiles is a German invention

... so perhaps American car manufacturers should obey what German authorities say?

Also: Are you checking with Italian authorities as to what you can use Volta's discovery - electricity - for?

Then again, with all the scare mongering and War on Civil Rights/Terror, the U.S. might make the Internet as full of restrictions and surveillance as the dictatorships want...

[mcgen]

No it isn't

Do your research.

[ddogg2]

New Zealand is really only good country to take control

new zealand shoud take control of the net think about it nice place great views people still trust each other here. Amercains have to look behide them to make sure the person behide hasn't got a bomb

[R Me]

Pony Up

Time for the
UN and the cry baby countries to pony up. If they want continued access they need to shoulder the cost. The US should figure out how much it expended to get the Internet off the ground and tell the cry-babies to pay your fair share or just ****.

[HitNRunI95]

The Industrial Revolution?

"Countries are asking that an (now grown too) international resource potentially as catalitic as the industrial revolution be managed by an international body."

1)The Industrial Revolution was managed by an international body?

2) Name one thing- ANY political issue EVER- that was adequately dealt with through "an international body."

"So far I've heard nothing but emotional arguments for why this is such a bad thing."

So far there's been nothing but emotional arguments for why this is even being considered. On the one hand, you have dictatorships, communist juntas- and those are just the "bad guys." The "good guys" are socialist establishments who believe in regulating "innapropriate" and "destructive" speech. They're trying to take control from a country with as near-total freedom of speech as has ever existed in a viable state- a country that invented, maintains, restricts next to nothing and has no moral or ethical reason to relinquish control.

On the other hand, you have emotional cries of "international bodies," "moral authority," "world legitimacy" and other oxymorons which are basically ways for failed and failing states to impose their will on more successful nations that are sensitive about their public image.

"If it can be managed by an international body who can keep the open standards"

It can't. In case you've been asleep the last twenty years, international bodies can't manage anything without the primary backing of a national body strong enough to do the job itself.

The U.N. can't even keep Libya and Sudan off the Human Rights Council. When mocked about this, the only response of the Turtle Bay Boosters is to dredge up unfortunate incidents from the West and try for moral equivalency.

Sorry, we have too much riding on this "Internet" thing to assauge your feelings by letting you run it into the ground. You are, of course, perfectly free to make your own.

[c_lee]

For God's sake, leave it in the US hands!!!!

I can't fathom the arguments put forth by critics on wrestling control of the NET from US control. This is because the arguments just don't add up. Worse, they don't make sense.

Many critics seem eager to curtail the flow of information over the NET. They opine that this could only be achieved if it is taken away from US control. This SHOULD AND MUST NEVER be allowed to happen.

There is no country in the world where the freedom of expression is so wholeheartedly enshrined in the national constitution and upheld as in the US, even if this may not be perfect.

The UN for what it is founded on HAS NEVER demonstrated that it has lived to that commitment, even under the tutelage of Kofi Annan. So, all the flowery talk on multilateralism by Annan and democracy as expoused by the Greek PM is lacking in substance!

[c_lee]

For God's sake, leave it in the US hands!!!!

I can't fathom the arguments put forth by critics on wrestling control of the NET from US control. This is because the arguments just don't add up. Worse, they don't make sense.

Many critics seem eager to curtail the flow of information over the NET. They opine that this could only be achieved if it is taken away from US control. This SHOULD AND MUST NEVER be allowed to happen.

There is no country in the world where the freedom of expression is so wholeheartedly enshrined in the national constitution and upheld as in the US. Even if this may not be perfect, it is a credible model that no country in the world comes anywhere close to.

The UN for what it is founded on HAS NEVER demonstrated that it has lived to that commitment, even under the tutelage of Kofi Annan. So, all the flowery talk on multilateralism by Annan and democracy as expoused by the Greek PM is lacking in substance!

Critics should jolly well keep their silence and offer more constructive comments on maintaining the status quo of the NET as a frontier of freedom as it currently is.

[bluemist9999]

Logistics Don't Make Sense

Suppose we did hand over control of the Internet to the UN. How would it determine who runs what? Who would be responsible for the DNS root servers?

Also, in the event of a crisis, is it best to make decisions by committee?

On the basis of logistics alone, I don't see how the UN could effectively run the Internet. I'm not sure sole US ownership of the Internet is a great idea either, but I don't see any more effective solution.

[jjones730]

Another option

I don't think U.S. and U.N. are necessarily the only alternatives for who could control the Internet.

Why not let the Internet be controlled by an internationally organized, non-profit organization that is responsible for maintaining the overall accessibility and structure of the Internet while not given authority to police the actual content.

Hey, wait a minute, that's *exactly* how it works right now under ICANN.

[spectrum9]

Phooie

Add one more to the thousands of reasons we should get out of the UN, throw them out of our Country and remodel their NY Headquarters into a High-Rise Condominium!

[spectrum9]

Phooie

Add one more to the thousands of reasons we should get out of the UN, throw them out of our Country and remodel their NY Headquarters into a High-Rise Condominium!

[_chad_]

Ha

You are an idiot. New Zealand is incapable of such a responsibility and most certainly would not uphold the same level of freedom of speech.
I personally consider arguments in favor of taking control away from the US flawed, but at least partially backed by reasonable ideas. Your arguments in favor of New Zealand holding any sort of decision making power over the Internet are without merit and a complete joke.

[_chad_]

oops

Previous comment should have been appended to the comment about New Zealand taking control of the net.

[NickPolitis1234567]

Come up with something better

If they can come up with something better then do it. We came up with the internet. You come up with your own thing. Don't try to take something we made up and screw it up. If you can make something better
Everyone will use it. That's why America is so great. We are so much freer than anyone else this is that's why we came up with the internet. Have you ever heard "Build it, and they will come" So build it, but stop whining. N

[NickPolitis1234567]

Come up with something better

If they can come up with something better then do it. We came up with the internet. You come up with your own thing. Don't try to take something we made up and screw it up. If you can make something better
Everyone will use it. That's why America is so great. We are so much freer than anyone else this is that's why we came up with the internet. Have you ever heard "Build it, and they will come" So build it, but stop whining. N

[qwerty75]

They did

It is called the world wide web.

I wonder how many people here understand the difference between them?

[MarkSQueen]

The U.N. running the Internet?

If the U.N. wants one so badly, why don't they go get the other "Member Nations" to pony up the cash it takes to build an "U.N. Sponsored Internet"? Instead of trying to co-opt the one originally designed and built by DARPA with US tax dollars?

I'm sure the "Member Nations" are looking for anything they can finance that can make the "Imperialist Americans" look backward and foolish. This looks like the ticket! GO U.N. !!!

[bohol_concept]

Leave well enough alone

The UN, despite its noble image brought to you by biased media, is not a single unified entity. Even now, ask

yourself, ask them, have they established the definition of "terrorist". How can the world put the control of the

freest communication method to the UN? At least with UCANN, world forces can influence because as a FREE entity,

they can be convinced. I do not profess expertise with world politics or technical knowledge but I know that the

threat of China, who has enough clout to force a free commercial entity as powerful as Google to alter its policy,

and gag its chinese version, far outweighs the relatively small issues of control over domain names and such. I am

not a big fan of the US, especially after the actions of its government and president and many other americans, but

I know that if the way the net runs is handed over to an institution with no clear loyalties or leadership the net

is in big trouble. If i hear this move actually happening, i plan on downloading everything i can before the net

shuts freedom down. The honest corruption of US is preferable to the quiet hypocrisy of the UN.