Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Behind the Fight to Control the Internet

Posted by Zonk on from the not-a-fan-of-forced-governance dept.

Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "The battle over control of the Internet and ICann (previously slashdotted here and here) gets placed in broader context in the Wall Street Journal. The article explains the role of 'other nations' discomfort with the U.S. as the world's only superpower, unafraid of taking unilateral action,' a fear intensified by the U.S.'s move to halt the introduction of .xxx domains for pornography sites. In a related column, Frederick Kempe opens the floor for a debate between the diplomat leading talks for the U.S., and the former journalist from Luxembourg leading the effort to move the Internet away from U.S. control. 'Today, in a globalized world in which the Internet has become a global resource for freedom of expression and for economic exchange, this monopolistic oversight of the Internet by one government is no longer a politically tenable solution,' Viviane Reding says. Kempe also suggests ways the two sides can split the difference."

8 of 593 comments (clear)

  1. .xxx domains by sedyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FTA: "Icann had tentatively approved the new domain name, called .xxx, several months earlier, but at the last moment the Department of Commerce removed its support, after it said it received thousands of letters of complaint from conservative Christian groups and others."

    Why wouldn't these people be in favour of an .xxx domain? Hell, wouldn't it make it easier to block sites at work or home?

    I mean, what's easier to spot as porn (domain names made up because I'm at work and cannot check for a good example):

    searchmovies.com or searchmovies.xxx

    --
    Am I open minded towards open source, or closed minded towards closed source?
    1. Re:.xxx domains by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why wouldn't these people be in favour of an .xxx domain? Hell, wouldn't it make it easier to block sites at work or home?

      You're failing to understand puritanism. These people are not interested in blocking porn so they don't have to see it. They are interested in making porn illegal so you can't see it. Anything that legitimizes porn, or makes it less offensive and less of a problem for the general populace is something they are against. Similarly, puritans are not against gay marriage because they are afraid they might be forced to marry someone of the same sex. They are against it because they are terrified that somewhere, someone might be having butt sex and only by acting like complete jackasses can they advertise to everyone that they, do not want butt sex (I suspect because many of them secretly do and are ashamed of that fact).

    2. Re:.xxx domains by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but at the last moment the Department of Commerce removed its support, after it said it received thousands of letters of complaint from conservative Christian groups and others.

      Which is the reason why ONE SINGLE country should NOT be in control of internet domains. Many (if not the majority of) internet users are _NOT_ christian, why should christians of the U.S. be messing around? Now suppose it wasn't christians, but scientologists. Ta-da! Instant censorship of the internet, driven by private groups.

      Allowing conservative, liberal or whatever groups in a single country to determine the availability of domain names, is nothing but expanding corporate lobbying into scopes way beyond the U.S. government.

      After all, this is one of the reasons why we have the United Nations. Right?

    3. Re:.xxx domains by mooingyak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This means people would have an easy way of knowing where to find porn.

      Because nowadays all the porn is really difficult to find?

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
  2. Re:Let us not forget the internic/registrar split by Neil+Blender · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I dream of the old days of one domain registrar

    Do you dream of $500 domain names? Cause that's what I paid for my first one.

  3. For fucks sake... by Psionicist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Stop referring to the root DNS servers as "control of the Internet!". Absolutely anyone can set up their own DNS-servers and call them root (in fact, I set up my own DNS and redirected all ".test"-domains to another computer in the network, just to show a friend it could be done). The only reason the current root servers are considered important is because everyone use them.

  4. Internet vs DNS by kevinbr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As usual everyone keeps confusing the "Internet" with the DNS.

    Common Quote - We invented it, we want to keep it.

    This of course is a stupid argument - the Internet is many things - WWW being the most obvious. And the Web was invented where?

    Common misconception - repressive countries need to control DNS root servers to repress......not so.

    Cisco and other vendors sell products that today succeed in blocking site not allowed. Most Arab countries filter the internet behind proxy servers and cisco firewalls.

    The real issue at stake is that ICANN is an opaque organization that was handed control of the root file with no REAL input from ALL internet stakeholders. ICANN today holds the power to drop any country off the DNS system. The EU itself had to apply for permission to ICANN for the .EU domain. ICANN could have refused, as they did for .XXX. ICANN decides who in a country get delegated control of that TLD management function of a country.

    The real issue is that prior to 1998, IANA had plans to open up hundreds of top level domains......which plans were then shelved with no open process by ICANN. http://www.gtld-mou.org/gtld-discuss/mail-archive/ 00990.html

    The reality? Most Americans have no idea where ICANN came from or how it works or how it is not really beneficial for them, but they invoke this maddening knee jerk blind patriotism - it's ours and we run it. Sad that they have no idea who "we" is. ICANN is not "we". ICANN is undemocratic even for Americans, and is secretive. ICANN is in bed with WIPRO and seems to have a policy that supports big business. ICANN has no idea of trademark law. in short ICANN is NOT the answer for DNS governance.

  5. Good riddance to .xxx by jmorris42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > ICANN had all but approved the .XXX domain but because a few Christian groups complained...

    Good for them, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. .xxx was THE most stupid idea to come down the pike in a decade. So I really don't care who finally managed to get it put on hold, so long as it NEVER, EVER goes live as a tld. It would literally be the end of the Internet as we have known it.

    In a single stroke it would transform the Internet from a free and open instuition into one that was mandated by law to be child safe. .xxx would be banned universally yet all objectionable (read as not fit for a five year old) content would be forced to .xxx to avoid lawsuits. No, let us instead create .kids and lock the kiddies browswer to only go there.

    --
    Democrat delenda est