The Authoritarian Internet Power Grab - The Wall Street Journal.

["Dave Farber" <dave () farber net>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Mark* <mark () tmtstrategies com>
Date: Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Subject: DL- Fwd: The Authoritarian Internet Power Grab - The Wall Street
Journal.
To: Dave <dave () farber net>


FYI . . .

----- Forwarded message from Bill Frezza <Bill.Frezza () cei org> -----
   Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:44:57 +0000
   From: Bill Frezza <Bill.Frezza () cei org>
Subject: The Authoritarian Internet Power Grab - The Wall Street Journal.
     To: Mark Stahlman <mark () tmtstrategies com>

The Authoritarian Internet Power Grab


The Internet of Things will be worth trillions by 2025. China wants
centralized control.


The Wall Street Journal, Oct. 25, 2016

By Robert M. McDowell and Gordon M. Goldstein


The future of the internet could be at stake at a conference beginning this
week in Tunisia, where diplomats from more than 100 countries will debate
United Nations jurisdiction over the web. What emerges from the World
Telecommunication Standardization Assembly will affect geopolitics and
global economic growth, and possibly internet freedom for billions of users.


U.N. members will address cybercrime, privacy and the potential regulation
of internet companies, applications and content. Most important, diplomats
will discuss the emerging Internet of Things, which will soon connect tens
of billions of devices and people to the global network.


A new navigational and addressing technology, Digital Object Architecture
(DOA), could enable the real-time surveillance and tracking of each device
and individual connected to the web. Some governments are advocating that
DOA be the singular and mandatory addressing system for the Internet of
Things. They also want this system to be centrally controlled by the U.N.’s
International Telecommunication Union, which has contractual rights to the
underlying intellectual property.


At the meeting in Tunisia, China is working to join the leadership of the
global study group on DOA and the Internet of Things, which the U.N.
projects <http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/wtsa16/Documents/WTSA16Infographic.pdf>
will generate $6 trillion in global economic value by 2025.


Digital Object Architecture tracking tools could be integrated into
industries ranging from aviation to pharmaceuticals.‎Such a system could
also help governments mandate charges for any online financial transaction,
such as through bank ATMs, credit-card payments, electronic money transfers
or mobile banking. Such transaction taxes could upend the pace of
investment and innovation in the internet space and distort global commerce.


The brewing conflict comes at a difficult moment. On Oct. 1, the Obama
administration relinquished its legal oversight of the Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann), which manages the Domain Name
System. The fight over Icann’s future ended a decadeslong bipartisan
consensus on how to protect an open internet. U.S. policy makers should put
the Icann fight behind them and work together to think strategically about
the emerging geopolitics of the internet and restore both‎unity and resolve
to a fragmented American tech policy. At risk is the internet’s technical
architecture and regulatory structure, which scores of nations seek to
bring under foreign government and multilateral control.


These latest developments are part of a broader shift in the relationship
between government and the internet. Countries like Russia, Iran and Saudi
Arabia are all pursuing a grand strategy to use international
organizations, particularly the U.N., to control the digital future. The
Tunisia conference is the latest in a series of efforts to expand the
International Telecommunication Union’s mandate beyond its historical
function of telecommunications coordination.


Today’s global fight over internet freedom started more than a decade ago.
In 2003, China, Russia and other countries initiated a persistent and
patient campaign to bring Icann under the control of the United Nations. In
2012 the U.S. led a coalition of 55 countries that refused to sign a global
treaty negotiated in Dubai that would have expanded the U.N.’s reach and
power to shape how key aspects of the internet operate.


While the U.S. and some of its internet allies rejected the Dubai power
grab, 89 other countries voted for more U.N. influence, including an
enlarged role in “international Internet governance and for ensuring the
stability, security and continuity of the existing Internet and its future
development.” That particular resolution<http://www.itu.int/
en/wcit-12/documents/final-acts-wcit-12.pdf> was rammed through at 1:30
a.m. on the penultimate night of the conference—forcing the U.S.
delegation, of which we were both members—to contest the conference’s
legitimacy and boycott its result.


In 2015 a coalition comprised of China and 134 other countries submitted a
manifesto to another U.N. meeting insisting that national
governments—rather than NGOs, civil society, consumers or business
innovators—should dictate the digital future. The bloc declared that
“overall authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the
sovereign right of States.”


In April Russia’s Vladimir Putin<http://topics.wsj.com/pe
rson/P/Vladimir-Putin/6409> and the leaders of China and India issued a
joint communiqué proclaiming “the need to internationalize Internet
governance” and enhance the role of the U.N. Momentum, energy and numbers
are on their side. As is bureaucratic power: A Chinese government diplomat
is today the secretary-general of the U.N.’s International
Telecommunication Union.


The first iteration of the privatized internet was conceived and controlled
by the nongovernmental global technical community, civil society and the
private economy, which unleashed the greatest wave of innovation in world
history. The internet of the future, in contrast, may be shaped by foreign
governments and the U.N. if countries like Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and
China achieve their strategic objective.


America must quickly move beyond the divisive argument about Icann and
regain its internet-policy footing. Many more consequential battles over
internet freedom loom—conflicts that will shape the digital future. It is
time for the U.S. to unify again behind a bipartisan vision and common
strategy to safeguard internet freedom for tomorrow.


Mr. McDowell, a former Republican commissioner of the Federal
Communications Commission, is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. Mr.
Goldstein, a Democrat, is an adjunct senior fellow at the Council on
Foreign Relations.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-authoritarian-internet-power-grab-1477436573
_______________________________________________________
Bill Frezza
Fellow, The Competitive Enterprise Institute
Host, RealClear Radio Hour
Boston, MA 617-417-5916<tel:617-417-5916> Bill () RealClearRadio org<x-appl
e-msg-load://5BEC2178-B827-4858-B3BC-36C178B3674C/bill () RealClearRadio org>
WXKS 1200 AM & WJMN 94.5 FM-HD2 Boston
KNEW 960 AM & KOSF 103.7 FM-HD2 San Francisco
Listen live on iHeartRadio<http://www.iheart.com/live/Bloomberg-1200-945FM-
HD2-4705/> or catch the podcasts on
www.RealClearRadio.org<http://www.realclearradio.org/>

----- End forwarded



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20161026075822:79E082FE-9B73-11E6-A2A1-B7881785C94C
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com