France: Internet summit likely to get nowhere

In run-up to U.N. conference, government official says U.S. is unlikely to accept multinational approach to Internet oversight.

The story "France: Internet summit likely to get nowhere" published November 10, 2005 at 1:15 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.

[zhemgang]

This Conference is a Good Example

...of what happens should a UN body would administer the internet.
The conference is being held in a country with some of the most
oppresive censorship of the internet possible. People in Tunisia
have been put in jail for posting information the governenment
doesn't like and websites are routinely censored and blocked. Good
job UN!

[yrrahxob]

They are just jealous

It's just another ploy of governments that don't agree with the way we run things over here where we don't have a lot of censorship to try and inflict their narrow-minded idealolgies on the American public. I think we should drop out of the U.N. and maybe they could move their headquaters to Tunisia.

[techguy83]

No U.S. in the U.N.=

death of the U.N. They will lose their NYC home. Alot of funding we put into that.

We will save: the money on that building's utilities and such(water, lights, etc.)

The league of Nations failed when America didn't join. If we were to leave the U.N. It would fail too.

[npxzbebq]

Run a different domain system

It's entirely feasible to run a totally different domain scheme. It's all basically IP based anyway. You can put servers anywhere. Why fight old battles? Just leverage the Internet as it was designed to (decentralized). What's with this obsolete paradigm... it's just short term inconvenience.

[npxzbebq]

Not specifically pro-UN comment actually

ANYONE can run a new system over the Internet. Doesn't really have to be an either/or the UN/USA thing. Key phrase: "de facto standard."

[lewissalem]

Let me get this straigh:

American tax dollars fund the creation of the internet as we know it; it becomes wildly popular; socialist governments decide that it should be shared with everybody and administered by a union of nations, some of which are not democracies; negative press about the US is generated about how stubborn we are.

Ha!

[Razzl]

Don't leave us hanging

Whoa, that last sentence sounded very important and should have been explained at greater length--why is it significant that ICANN's contract is expiring this coming year? If the contract is only with the US DOD and the Bush administration wants to keep control of the domain naming in US hands, then why wouldn't they just renew the contract? Are other countries signatories to the contract, and if so, what influence do they have on renewal? You can't lead us to such an important fact and then leave us hanging...