America Relinquishs Control of Internet

At the stroke of midnight on September 30, 2016, America said “good-bye” to its long-time oversight of the internet, and along with it, the certainty of internet freedom.

Because the internet was started in the United States, from its inception, the system of managing domain names and numbers has always been conducted in or by the United States.  In 1998, the Department of Commerce (DoC) contracted ICANN, a California-based non-profit, to perform the function of IANA[1] management.  It’s a critical role to ensure that internet domain names are not duplicated and that the assigned numbers are secure.  DoC maintained oversight of ICANN and also performed some related administrative tasks.

Under U.S. oversight, ICANN has been doing a stellar job of keeping the internet free and secure.  But, as internet usage expanded beyond U.S. borders, demands came for the U.S. to cede control of internet oversight.  These demands were always resisted.  Then, on March 14, 2015, the Obama Administration announced that it would relinquish internet oversight and place it into the hands of a then-unnamed global multi-stakeholder.  Free speech advocates and others expressed concern that the move might result in domain management falling into the hands of dictatorial regimes such as China or Russia.  Both the DoC and ICANN assured the public that they would not allow internet oversight to transfer to a tyrannical government or to any government entity.

The proposed plan to transfer stewardship of IANA was finally completed in March of 2016 at an ICANN conference held in Morrocco.  Under this proposal, ICANN itself will maintain authority over IANA, but will create an oversight body called the “empowerment community” to which it will have to answer.  The proposal also imbues ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) with increased say.  Though ICANN’s bylaws prohibit any particular government from making direct decisions regarding budgets, board member removal or ICANN governance, the new proposal will now make the GAC a participant in these decisions.  Additionally, the requirement to reject GAC proposals will increase from a simple majority vote to a vote of 60 percent.  These changes defeat the original purpose of the Committee, which was to ensure that no government would have too much influence over ICANN’s operations.

Currently there are 171 government members of the GAC and 53 non-governmental members that have observer status, including the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC),[2] as well as all the United Nations’ agencies that have an interest in global internet governance. (This includes UNESCO, which is largely influenced by the OIC.)  Several of these members constitute tyrannical regimes or other types of anti-freedom entities.

When the discussion of Internet oversight relinquishment originally arose, some believed that because ICANN has no control over actual internet content, suppression of free speech was a non-issue.  They were wrong.  The OIC, claiming that it’s the “sole official representative of the Muslim world” and some of its Member States have already complained about the issuance of domain names “with an Islamic identity” such as .halal or .Islam, arguing that these should be reserved exclusively for OIC Member States so as not to “offend” Islam.  Even under U.S. oversight, ICANN deferred the decision on private applications for use of these domain names, in effect capitulating to the OIC’s demands.

Ed Black, President of the Computer and Communications Industry Association insists that all those who care about “internet freedom” support the transfer.  Yet, how this “internet freedom” is interpreted, is obviously up for grabs.  ICANN’s CEO and President admitted in his testimony at a recent Senate hearing, that ICANN is not bound by America’s First Amendment.  Nor are the governments of other countries.  For example, European countries that claim to have “freedom of speech,” argue that “hate speech” is not “free speech” and accordingly have various types of hate speech laws.  Often, they do a balancing test of “freedom of speech” versus a so-called “right” to be free from “offense”.  America is the only country in the world that truly protects free speech.

Full article by Deborah Weiss at The Front Page Magazine found here.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s