USG rescinds 'leave internet alone' policy

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Richard Forno <rforno () infowarrior org>
> Date: February 26, 2010 9:06:56 PM EST
> To: Undisclosed-recipients: <>;
> Cc: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
> Subject: USG rescinds 'leave internet alone' policy

> Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/27/internet_3_dot_0_policy/
>
> US government rescinds 'leave internet alone' policy
>
> By Kieren McCarthy
>
> Posted in Networks, 27th February 2010 00:06 GMT
>
> The US government’s policy of leaving the Internet alone is over, ac 
> cording to Obama’s top official at the Department of Commerce.
>
> Instead, an “Internet Policy 3.0” approach will see policy  
> discussions between government agencies, foreign governments, and ke 
> y Internet constituencies, according to Assistant Secretary Larry St 
> rickling, with those discussions covering issues such as privacy, ch 
> ild protection, cybersecurity, copyright protection, and Internet go 
> vernance.
>
> The outcomes of such discussions will be “flexible” but may  
> result in recommendations for legislation or regulation, Strickling  
> said in a speech at the Media Institute in Washington this week.
>
> The new approach (http://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/2010/MediaInstitute_02242010.html 
> ) is a far cry from a US government that consciously decided not to  
> intrude into the internet’s functioning and growth and in so doing a 
> llowed an academic network to turn into a global communications phen 
> omenon.
>
> Strickling referred to these roots arguing that it was “the right po 
> licy for the United States in the early stages of the Internet, and  
> the right message to send to the rest of the world.” But, he continu 
> ed, “that was then and this is now. As we at NTIA approach a wide ra 
> nge of Internet policy issues, we take the view that we are now in t 
> he third generation of Internet policy making.”
>
> Outlining three decades of internet evolution - from transition to  
> commercialization, from the garage to Main Street, and now, starting  
> in 2010, the “Policy 3.0” approach - Strickling argued that with  
> the internet is now a social network as well a business network. “We 
>  must take rules more seriously.”
>
> He cited a number of examples where this new approach was needed:  
> end users worried about credit card transactions, content providers  
> who want to prevent their copyright, companies concerned about  
> hacking, network neutrality, and foreign governments worried about  
> Internet governance systems.
>
> The decision to effectively end the policy that made the internet  
> what it is today is part of a wider global trend of governments  
> looking to impose rules on use of the network by its citizens.
>
> In the UK, the Digital Economy Bill currently making its way through  
> Parliament has been the subject of significant controversy for  
> advocating strict rules on copyright infringement and threatening to  
> ban people from the internet if they are found to do so. The bill  
> includes a wide variety of other measures, including giving  
> regulator Ofcom a wider remit, forcing ISPs to monitor their  
> customers’ behavior, and allowing the government to take over the do 
> t-uk registry.
>
> In New Zealand, a similar measure to the UK’s cut-off provision has  
> been proposed by revising the Copyright Act to allow a tribunal to f 
> ine those found guilty of infringing copyright online as well as sus 
> pend their Internet accounts for up to six months. And in Italy this 
>  week, three Google executives were sentenced to jail for allowing a 
>  video that was subsequently pulled down to be posted onto its YouTu 
> be video site.
>
> Internationally, the Internet Governance Forum – set up by under a U 
> nited Nations banner to deal with global governance issues – is due  
> to end its experimental run this year and become an acknowledged ins 
> titution. However, there are signs that governments are increasingly 
>  dominating the IGF, with civil society and the Internet community s 
> idelined in the decision-making process.
>
> In this broader context, the US government’s newly stated policy is  
> more in line with the traditional laissez-faire internet approach. I 
> nternet Policy 3.0 also offers a more global perspective than the is 
> olationist approach taken by the previous Bush administration.
>
> In explicitly stating that foreign governments will be a part of the  
> upcoming discussions, Strickling recognizes the United States’ uniqu 
> e position as the country that gives final approval for changes made 
>  to the internet’s “root zone.” Currently the global Internet  
> is dependent on an address book whose contents are changed through a 
>  contract that the US government has granted to the Internet Corpora 
> tion for Assigned Names and Number (ICANN), based in Los Angeles.
>
> ICANN recently adjusted its own agreement with the US government to  
> give it more autonomy and now reports to the global Internet  
> community through a series of reviews. Strickling sits on the panel  
> of one of those reviews.
>
> Overall, this new approach could enable the US government to regain  
> the loss of some of its direct influence through recommendations  
> made in policy reports. But internet old hands will still decry the  
> loss of a policy that made the network what it is today. ®



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com