http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2005-09-30T173007Z_01_WRI062957_RTRUKOC_0_US-INTERNET.xml

The United Nations' International Telecommunications Union (ITU) is ready to take over governance of the Internet from the United States., ITU head Yoshio Utsumi said on Friday.

The United States has clashed with the European Union and much of the rest of the world over the future of the Internet. It currently manages the global information system through a partnership with California-based company ICANN.

"We could do it if we were asked to," Utsumi told a news conference. The U.N. agency's experience in communications, its structure and its cooperation with private and public bodies made it best-placed to take on the role, he said.

Washington has made clear it would oppose any such move despite widespread demands for changes in the current system.

"We will not agree to the United Nations taking over management of the Internet," said David Gross, a U.S. State Department official attending a two-week conference preparing for a U.N. "Information Society Summit" in Tunisia in November.

This...is going to get ugly...

what could the potential effects be, and or benefits for global users of the internet! hahaha

Well if we can't drive our cars because the Chinese are buying up all the oil and raising gas prices then we HAVE to keep as many ace cards in our hands as possible.

Next thing you know some outside country buys up the internet infrastructure and starts charging outlandish peering fees to connect the US with the outside world.

Besides, WE INVENTED THE DOGGONED INTERNET!!!!!!

The UN is full of corruption and highly mismanaged itself. There's no doubt in my mind if they were to assume this resposibility it would be a complete disaster for us all.

It would end up no longer being the World Wide Web. It would turn into a "Do you have your passport to enter our network?"

Originally posted by WebAuth


Besides, WE INVENTED THE DOGGONED INTERNET!!!!!!

Who is "we"?

Tim Berners-Lee is British.

Tim invented the World Wide Web back in late 80s not the Internet FYI.

the internet been there since the 60s between universities and US army when the cold war was taking place.

although icann is slow I would imagine that having the UN take it over would make things much much much slower

And as long as the US military operate the .MIL TLD, the Internet will be controlled by the US.... For the US military to acceed to non-US control of the root servers I think it'll have to get rather chilly where the Devil lives.

Eventually the US will need to lose control over it(although I do not expect it to be anytime soon)

Originally posted by Domainitor
And as long as the US military operate the .MIL TLD, the Internet will be controlled by the US.... For the US military to acceed to non-US control of the root servers I think it'll have to get rather chilly where the Devil lives.

Simple solution... .mil becomes .mil.us, .edu becomes .edu.us. Why should they have what are effectively GTLDs for their own exclusive use?

Lubeca: Because the Internet was invented here and those TLDs are legacy TLDs. :)

But the issue isn't solved with .mil.us, because the core issue is that the military need the Internet for a lot of what they do. The Pentagon isn't going to give that up easily.

dmaven: Why would the US have to lose control? It's been fine since '69....

Originally posted by Domainitor
dmaven: Why would the US have to lose control? It's been fine since '69....

It may have been fine when it was the ARPAnet. It may have been fine when Jon Postel was running it and it was being used by a few thousand techies and academics but not many other people. I don't think anybody thinks that ICANN is making a particularly good job of it...

And as for "we invented it" - in that case surely all telecommunications services should be under Italian control, seeing Marconi invented radio?

Heinrich Hertz invented radio. That's all Europe needs, a war between Germany and Italy.

Europe can't make an international system work. They can't agree on TV formats (PAL? Vertical SECAM? Horizontal SECAM? NTSC?), they can't get their power grid to run at a common voltage or frequency, the European Patent system is a mess only the UN could love. At least they all drive on the same side of the road now. Well, most of them.

Who else would you like to screw everything up? Japan? Half of Japan runs on 50 Hz, the other half on 60 Hz. Screwups.

The UN? The UN has never shown any talent for running anything at all, except running up bills.

If you want a worldwide network which works, leave it with the US.

I suspect that some countries which shelter fraudsters, spammers, child porno vendors, etc. want to eliminate the possibility of the US leaning on them to clean up their acts, by, say, cutting them out of the network if they can't "play well with others." And countries like China have no use for any network which isn't under tight government (their government, naturally) control. And they won't get that with the US calling the shots. So of course there's worldwide whining. Don't fall for it.

There is probably LOTS that us non-Americans could say in response to the previous post (which I personally find quite offensive). However, I think it's best to just ignore it and move on as this forum is about domain names, not politics.

Lubeca: I'm sure that no offense was intended by sauer and I know that none was intended by me.

As regards this thread, though, it's hard to avoid politics, as that's the basis for the thread's point.

Sauer's initial comments are observations -- all of them true. And the last paragraph is reasonable speculation (my clue was the phrase "I suspect") with a conclusion that reasonably followed the speculation.

Now, if you're personally responsible for the screwed up things that sauer mentioned, your being offended is understandable. And you should hang your head in shame, too. ;)

Me? I'm not responsible for most of the screw ups here, contrary to what you may read scribbled on the subway walls. :D So when people point 'em out (the screw ups, not the scribblings) I don't waste my time being offended. I do, however, expend some of my energy trying to get things fixed. That seems to me to be a better use of my time and energy....

Hey sauer -- is that Sauer as in SiG? I'm a P226 fan....

thats true why the US owns .gov and .edu and .mil ?

it was open to all back in 90s to have .edu and .gov and then got limited and countries were pushed to have their own .edu.xx or .ac.xx and .gov.xx then the US took over the .edu .gov ?

total discrimination IMO

its either all governments can use .gov and all schools can use .edu or push the US to use their own ccTLD and start having .gov.us and .edu.us like the rest of the world.

Bashar, do you have a credible reference for your claim that .EDU and .GOV were ever open to non-US entities? In all candor, I wasn't paying attention to .EDU and .GOV back then -- still ain't -- but I'm curious to know if that's true.

By your logic, though, I should be able to get me a .NL, but I can't 'cause I'm not in the Netherlands. And since I've no certificate from the Kuwait Ministry of Commerce, I can't get a .KW, either....

www.kuniv.edu :)

it was open till late 90s and they restricted it

btw back in 90s when internic was running the show .com was called US Commercial not Commercial too

when ICANN took over things all stuff has changed

:) Sweet.

Back in 1995 I registered a .EDU for a school that wasn't a "four year degree-granting institution." It was an elementary (primary) school. My understanding at the time was that if you crossed your fingers sometimes they slipped through. But the criteria was "four year degree-granting institution."

Do you have any reference to .GOVs being "kicked out" of the TLD?

many ppl had reg'ed .edu names back then and they didnt have schools even such as arab.edu arabia.edu and friend owned domain i dont want to mention in public :) and the list goes on. I remember people used to run vhosts for IRC ended by .edu just to be able to connect on IRC servers hosted on universities :D

for .GOV i dont recall any international (non-US) site runs on .gov at the moment but i was in process of registering kuwait.gov back in 90s for the government but they weren't interested in providing the paperwork to register it

although the process was on going and if i provided the required paperwork i would reg'ed it for them. (when registering .gov domains was handled by internic or netsol back then)

Lubeca, im affraid im not as easily left as you are, i too found it quite offencive, espically when it seems to lack a lot of infomation.


Europe can't make an international system work.

Thats quite a lot of countrys your talking about, not to sound race/countryist, have you ever heard of german effiency?


They can't agree on TV formats (PAL? Vertical SECAM? Horizontal SECAM? NTSC?)

PAL is used in most of western europe (its hard to know weather you mean europe as the continent or as in the EU)
(reference: http://www.disctronics.co.uk/technology/video/video_intro.htm)


They can't get their power grid to run at a common voltage or frequency


European electricity is generally supplied at a 220 volts and a frequency of 50 Hz. Officially it is 230 volts plus or minus 10%. Some localities have 110 volts, but 50 cycles is the standard frequency regardless of the voltage throughout Europe
(reference: http://www.enjoy-europe.com/hte/chap11/electric.htm)


It might not be perfect accross all of europe, but bear in mind, the europe is made up of several countries, each with their own governments. Comparing the US to europe just doesnt work, if you want to compare the US to Europe, pick a country in europe, at least its fair then.

The internet is a GLOBAL network, it does in manyways make more sense to be controled by a global body/agency.

The UN may not be the right people to do it, but i firmly belive that it should not remain under the US control, as its a global network.

awibble has already pointed out much of the misinformation in Sauer's post. May I point out another one?


I suspect that some countries which shelter fraudsters, spammers, child porno vendors, etc. want to eliminate the possibility of the US leaning on them to clean up their acts

Other countries shelter fraudsters, spammers etc - but the US does not? From what I understand from spam newsgroups the world's "spam capital" is in fact Boca Raton FL, and much of the world's spam, while sent through servers in China, Korea or Brazil, ultimately originates from the USA. And when has the US government ever leant on other countries to clean up their act Internet-wise, as Sauer implies?

Domainitor - what I find offensive is the implication that the US is somehow better than the rest of us. "US good - rest of the world bad", to paraphrase George Orwell.

I actually missed that Lubeca, probably because i was busy making sure i had my fact stright.

I would like to add to your comment tho.

i have just intergated the last 10 spam emails in my inbox (i get about 5 a day) 9 orginated in the USA and 1 from Malysia!

Looks like europe didnt send me any!

Right Uk should own the internet.
.edu is a crap domain neway .ac is much better and shorter.
Just about right from usa think they own the reast of the world and everyone else has to follow what they do.
Why doesnt the eu make its own internet and not let any americans in coz thats what it seems what the us is doing.

Originally posted by maniac king
Right Uk should own the internet.
.edu is a crap domain neway .ac is much better and shorter.
Just about right from usa think they own the reast of the world and everyone else has to follow what they do.
Why doesnt the eu make its own internet and not let any americans in coz thats what it seems what the us is doing.

How is the US doing that? You seem to be accessing it quite well right now.. If the UN was in control of the internet it would be just as you described though. It would turn into countries not allowing their people to travel out of their network boundaries or allowing others in. Imposing on them what they should and should not read or write. Certain countries wish to suppress their people. They don't want them to know of the freedoms they could have.

The UN would probably end up creating some sort of internet tax to fund their frivolous activities. And/or, taxes would be formed in the countries themselves and those who wish to buy or sell to these other countries via the internet would have to pay said taxes/ tarrifs or whatever.

I wana own the internet :(

Originally posted by maniac king
I wana own the internet :(

I will sell it to you, how does 10 Billion Dollars sound? (Cash no checks please only)

;)

10 billion only?

i'd bid 15 billion :dgrin:

Originally posted by Bashar
10 billion only?

i'd bid 15 billion :dgrin:

SOLD!

I will send you my wire information

:stickout:

Lack of information .... let's just see:


Thats quite a lot of countrys your talking about, not to sound race/countryist, have you ever heard of german effiency?


I've worked with it, and have a German company as a client for one of my inventions. Experience tells me that German efficiency is perhaps just a tad overrated. Of course, that's not what they say in those Volkswagen TV ads, but as reliable sources of technical information, I don't give those much weight.


PAL is used in most of western europe


Of course. And "most" isn't very promising if you're interested in worldwide standards, now is it? Despite "German efficiency" (PAL being a German development, as you doubtless know without looking it up).


European electricity is generally supplied at a 220 volts and a frequency of 50 Hz. Officially it is 230 volts plus or minus 10%. Some localities have 110 volts, but 50 cycles is the standard frequency regardless of the voltage throughout Europe


Yes indeed. The inventor of the modern electrical grid suggested 60 hz as it's more efficient than 50, but not everyone was paying attention.

Your notes about Europe aren't all that relevant. The world is a bit bigger than Europe, and not to be neglected in a global network.


It might not be perfect accross all of europe, but bear in mind, the europe is made up of several countries, each with their own governments.


Which is EXACTLY THE POINT.


The internet is a GLOBAL network, it does in manyways make more sense to be controled by a global body/agency.


And it many ways it makes sense to NOT do it that way. I've hinted at a few. My speculative list was not meant to be exhaustive. Those of you who are a little bit imaginative can doubtless think of more on your own.


And when has the US government ever leant on other countries to clean up their act Internet-wise, as Sauer implies?


I implied no such thing. I said that may be the fear motivating some of this attempt at a grab. I never said it had happened, nor did I imply that I thought it likely that it would happen. It is, however, a sensible concern, and some countries might well share it. The other motivations are - what? A vague notion that it "makes sense"?

Really, if you boys are too delicate to discuss political problems without being "offended" by a little honest speculation, then best not raise the questions. Now if someone had written that this attempt at a grab was motivated by international envy, or gross financial greed, or any of a number of common human foibles, I can see where someone might be offended. The accusations might still be true, of course, and being offended would hardly change that.

My Main point is,

The internet is Global
It should be controled by a global body
Not one country

I dont want the US to have control, i dont want the UK to have control, i dont want germany to have control. I just want it to be fair, a global system, controled by a globally regulated body.

American would still get their little say, UK would get theirs, Germany also etc etc.

Of course global resources should be controlled by global bodies and not by one country - and I don't think there are many people here who would disagree with this basic principle, regardless of what views they might have about ICANN or the ITU or the USA.

I dont like the US being able to put their foot down like this I do not trust their goverment.


However the internet WORKS I fear that we may jeprodise stability if we move control of the internet.

I have to admit ICANN do a good job at the end of the day.

Maybe is ICANN was left as the management company, but instead of been under US juristiction, it would work, nothing would really change then, except the US would have so much control, if that makes sense

Originally posted by awibble
Maybe is ICANN was left as the management company, but instead of been under US juristiction, it would work, nothing would really change then, except the US would have so much control, if that makes sense

You mean - ICANN as a truly global body instead of an arm of the US government?

exactly

They dont do a bad job, infact they are pretty good at it, but i dont like the idea that its another thing the usa goverment can control.

keep the staff, and the systems, but make it an arm of the UN

Why does it have to be the UN? Can't it just be a global consortium of different countries from a technology perspective? The UN has not exactly done a great job

That would also work fine, the reason i sugested the UN is because they are already established if you know what i mean.

i guess really, a new global body could be formed to handel all domain registrations, and all IP allocations basically been the 'controlling' company of the internet. The only problem i would see is that someone would basically end up owning it, and therefore wanting profit. Govenment type bodys are not jsut in it for the money.

There are a lot of complications in doing it, but i think it should be globally 'controled/regulated'

Originally posted by awibble

i guess really, a new global body could be formed to handel all domain registrations, and all IP allocations basically been the 'controlling' company of the internet. The only problem i would see is that someone would basically end up owning it, and therefore wanting profit. Govenment type bodys are not jsut in it for the money.



I would agree, I think once politics are involved it will make stop any kind of innovation

Originally posted by awibble
keep the staff, and the systems, but make it an arm of the UN

that won't work. eventually UN will muscle in and replace the staff & the system.

UN have a bad track record. you can google every actvities that UN did.

U.S. simply will not give up the Internet. it give U.S. too much leverage/edge for them to give up and the Pengaton won't allow it either. too much of military technologies are tied into internet. after, internet was created for U.S. military to survied nuke attack and resume communication. Tim invented HTTP not the Internet. Internet was created by the U.S.

Internet, (Not just World Wide Web) is way too important for the U.S. or any countries. let's say UK created it first. Would UK let go of their control of the global information system? i think not.

As mentioned previously, the internet is global and should not be centralised.

I suspect that some countries which shelter fraudsters, spammers, child porno vendors, etc. want to eliminate the possibility of the US leaning on them to clean up their acts, by, say, cutting them out of the network if they can't "play well with others." And countries like China have no use for any network which isn't under tight government (their government, naturally) control. And they won't get that with the US calling the shots. So of course there's worldwide whining. Don't fall for it.

Wake up, US is by FAR the biggest spamming country in the world. Not to mention most of the fraud and phishing attempts originate out of the US as well! http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/countries.lasso

The US is also for notorious for disregarding the UNs (world) decisions because they want to do what they want to do and disregard world opinion. Would you trust the only country to ever have dropped a atomic bomb on another country, as well as having the most of them in operation to control the global network infrastucture? The country which wages war at its own free will, disregarding what all other nations say.

Sure, you are trying to make points about how europe is not integrated - of course they are not perfect, they have been seperate countries for years! As for control of the internet, there would be a UN committe to work on this, and it would not be up to individual governments.

I do not think a single country should own it, but I also feel strongly against the UN running it.

Originally posted by crucialx
As mentioned previously, the internet is global and should not be centralised.



Wake up, US is by FAR the biggest spamming country in the world. Not to mention most of the fraud and phishing attempts originate out of the US as well! http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/countries.lasso

The US is also for notorious for disregarding the UNs (world) decisions because they want to do what they want to do and disregard world opinion. Would you trust the only country to ever have dropped a atomic bomb on another country, as well as having the most of them in operation to control the global network infrastucture?

America didn't start that war. We just finished it with a real big bang.

Did you ever consider the FACT. The majority of the internet is powered by the US. I'm not referring to the DNS. Where is your server located?





The country which wages war at its own free will, disregarding what all other nations say.



We also didn't sart this war. It was started by a terrorist.

Ask the people in the Bali cafes what they think about war on terrorism. Ask the people in the Uk subways. Ask the people in the World trade center. Unfortunately you can ask ALOT of them unless you can talk to the dead.

I don't agree with most of everything the Bush administration has done. And at last count I think it was somewhere around 64% of Americans agree with me. But what I do agree on is dismantling those who wish to kill innocent while going about their everyday lives such as having lunch in a cafe, commuting to work, or at work.

The majority of the countries don't really care about what goes on in other parts of the world unless it happens on their soil. Let's use the biggest opposers to the war on terrorism. The French, Lets say an American terrorist (which btw when is the last time you heard of one?) flew two airliners into their biggest office building and killed 3000 people. Do you think they would retaliate? Ofcourse they would.....






Sure, you are trying to make points about how europe is not integrated - of course they are not perfect, they have been seperate countries for years! As for control of the internet, there would be a UN committe to work on this, and it would not be up to individual governments.

Unfortunately the UN isn't working as it was intended when it first started. At this very moment you have countries which are very well known for suppressing their people sitting on commitees dealing with human rights issues.

Amoung the same committee a country whos army this very day rolls through town and rapes women and children, etc. I'm sure the list goes on


Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world and if we as a whole don't change it now it's only going to get worse from here. Where it is located and who has control over the interenet although that is the topic here should be at the bottom of the UN's list and concerns as it should be yours.

Not being from united states I would think it be best to keep outside us and let all county work together

Did you ever consider the FACT. The majority of the internet is powered by the US. I'm not referring to the DNS. Where is your server located?

We have servers located in both the US and Australia. :)

We also didn't sart this war. It was started by a terrorist.

The key word there a terrorist. The US is spending billions of dollars destroying the lives of many innocent civilians to catch a small group.

Ask the people in the Bali cafes what they think about war on terrorism. Ask the people in the Uk subways. Ask the people in the World trade center. Unfortunately you can ask ALOT of them unless you can talk to the dead.

I don't deny what is happening is a good thing, far from it, in fact I have been to Bali a number of times, I had friends there very close the bombings in Bali when they happened, as well as the UK bombings. Its very sad to see the lives of the Indonesians get destroyed by a small group within their country. But the way to fight violence is not always war.

The majority of the countries don't really care about what goes on in other parts of the world unless it happens on their soil. Let's use the biggest opposers to the war on terrorism. The French, Lets say an American terrorist (which btw when is the last time you heard of one?) flew two airliners into their biggest office building and killed 3000 people. Do you think they would retaliate? Ofcourse they would.....

I'm Australian, yet I still strongly appose the war in Iraq - and yes, Australia was specifically targeted with the Bali bombings. As I stated previously, war is not the solution to everything - take a look at Iraq now, its in ruins.

Unfortunately the UN isn't working as it was intended when it first started. At this very moment you have countries which are very well known for suppressing their people sitting on commitees dealing with human rights issues.

I would beg to differ here, human rights, poverty, starvation, and aids kill millions more than the few thousand which have the target of terror attacks! The US has spent $199 BILLION on the war in Iraq (http://costofwar.com/). This could literally save millions of starving, and poor people. This clearly shows that the US is only looking after their own interests and not world interests.

Another example of how the US helps with global situations, when the earthquake/tsunami took place earlier this year. Australia without question donated $1 BILLION to help out the effected countries, while at that time the US donated $50 million. Now compare Australia's GDP ($611 Billion) to the US GDP ($11 Trillion) (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html) and you start to see how the US really only takes matters which directly effect them into any serious consideration.

Why should a country which shows no real interest in global issues have full control over the internet?

I'm not saying the US should have no control over the internet, I'm saying it should be distributed. Sure, the US has a large portion of the internets infrastructure, but this does not mean it should control it entirely. What if something happens to the US? Having a centralized infrastructure would leave the rest of the worlds internet down/not working. This makes no sense whatsoever to leave all the core internet infrastructure in the US.

Yes, unfortunately GW has spent 1 trillion dollars by the end of this year. I don't like it. And I can guarantee if every other citizen realized how much his administration has spent they wouldn't like it either. I've already said I don't like what he and his administration is doing. If I was in chrage forget about sending 130,000 soldiers over there. I would just send a few hundred, find the suspicious places and bomb the hell out of them... It shouldn't be to hard to find a 6'3 male riding a camel with a dialysis machine attached to it....

The thing is most people try to just go about their every day lives and don;t pay attention to whats really going on. By the time GW ends his reign in office every man woman and child in America will owe in excess of $30,000 to his debt.

I dunno about you but thats a whole lot of damn money to me. Yes ,alot of money is being spent on the war. But do you know where that money is going? Outside of the US. It's being spent on contracts with businesses in countries outside of the US. I as a american citizen would much rather an american company get those contracts since it is my money.

You state you wish for it to be elsewhere.. Where do you think it safer? Do you think it would be safe in italy? Or anywhere else for that matter. This day and time noone and nothing is safe. **** you and your anti-american attitude. The funny thing is america happens to consist of many cultures living in unison. Why can't you grasp the concept? Love thy neighbor is what I live by but personaly I'm glad you're not my neighbor. Goodluck dodging those bombs in the future.

BTW thats -1,000,000,000,000 in six years of office. And I guess you can throw in the 80 billion dollar surplus he joined office with but thats chump change to a chump...

You state you wish for it to be elsewhere.. Where do you think it safer? Do you think it would be safe in italy? Or anywhere else for that matter. This day and time noone and nothing is safe. **** you and your anti-american attitude. The funny thing is america happens to consist of many cultures living in unison. Why can't you grasp the concept? Love thy neighbor is what I live by but personaly I'm glad you're not my neighbor. Goodluck dodging those bombs in the future.

You really mistook what I said, I feel the exact same frustration towards the Australian government and our prime minister. This is in no way meant to be anti-american. Australia was also involved in the war in Iraq! Do I agree with it, no. Do I agree with the centralised control of the internet in ANY country, no. Do I agree with the centralised control of the internet in Europe, no. Do I agree with the decentralised control of the net distributed, YES.

Having the largest number of our clients located within the US, I can tell you for sure I am not anti-amercian. I'm simply stating why the core internet infrastructure should not solely be located in the US. I'm sorry you took it the wrong way.

Where do you think it safer? Do you think it would be safe in italy?
Read above: distributed. There should be no centralised control.

The thing is most people try to just go about their every day lives and don;t pay attention to whats really going on. By the time GW ends his reign in office every man woman and child in America will owe in excess of $30,000 to his debt.

Yes, we have the same issues with our PM, wasted plenty of our money in Iraq and continues to do so. But I'm not saying we (Australia) should have centralised control of the internet!

The funny thing is america happens to consist of many cultures living in unison. Why can't you grasp the concept?
You are making assumptions, Australia is largely consisted of multiple cultures, how has this got to do with anything to do with the topic at hand?

The topic keeps being changed to how America is doing this and that in other areas.. Alot of people believe the war is being done to make the world a safer place. Unfortunately, it's making things worse. It's creating a whole new breed of terrorists

The group you are referring to isn't as small as you might believe. They have been training thousands of people for years. Greatfully I'm not a religious person. For those of you who are sit back and analyze whats going on in this world. Everything you see has to do with religious beliefs. I believe in us all getting along. I could care less who you pray to and how you live your life...

i don't think Iraq War is a lost at all.

One important thing - Saddam is removed! along with his opperssed regime and it give the people a chance to start over and rebuild.

why do people alway forget that you can rebuild house, highway, farm but you can't do all that if you have a dictator.

Do you think Iraq people are better with Saddam in charge or have them rebuild a new govrt.?

a better Iraq in middle east can be a good beacon for the rest of countries like Iran.

guys lets stick to domains and what was the OP thread all about!

Thanks.

This has gone onto more of a political tangent, I agree with bashar lets stick to domain names

*whistles at the responses*

No doubt we all agree that, ideally, the internet should be a joint
effort by all countries coming together. But turning that into reality
is going to take a looooooooooooooooong time.

Not to mention there are things "worse" than ICANN. :D

Originally posted by davezan
Not to mention there are things "worse" than ICANN. :D

really? What would that be? George Bush? (oops did I say that)

:eek:

As much as many of you may feel the need to bring bush and the war on iraq into the picture, it's really not the topic at hand here. Why not start a new thread?

It's not a matter of the internet being "US created" so much as its "US government created." The gov sponsored its development. It created this new medium, and it was its sole user for years before the public had access to it. It's by the US governments benevolence that any of us get to use it for our own purposes at all.

All of these europeans complaining about what a horrible bully the US is really need to get a grip. If you dont like it, get out. Create your own communication protocols. Finance its development on your own. Don't expect to be given complete control over something just because you want a "piece of the action." :rolleyes:

This debate is similar to the one over GPS. Developed by the US military and used exclusively by them for decades, it was finally licensed for public use. Then - of course - europe begins bitching that they want control of the network too.

Im sorry... im not even a US citizen - im canadian - and i think this "ITS NOT FAIR" temper tantrum europe has every time the US has control of something is absolutely absurd.

Don't expect to be given complete control over something just because you want a "piece of the action."

Read: nobody is asking for complete control except for the US!

Originally posted by crucialx
Read: nobody is asking for complete control except for the US!

It's not so much somebody wanting control, as compared to somebody taking control away from you when they shouldn't.

If you took the time to create a new device (call it a widget for all intensive purposes). It starts out small, just you and your buddies have one, but more and more people begin to want one. You start to let them all use your widgets if you want, but you still have control over it. One day a governing body comes up and says: hey! it looks like the whole country is starting to use this, we really think we should have control over it now that it's nationwide.

That is not the perfect anology, but follows along pretty well with the post your post was in reference to.

It's not so much somebody wanting control, as compared to somebody taking control away from you when they shouldn't.

Please tell me why the US should have control over other countries internet. They are owned and built by other countries, NOT by the US. The US will not "loss" control, there will be simply more counties who have a say in matters that deal with the internet.

This is not a "who built it first" matter, its not about that - the US has clearly done that. Its matter of distribution and working together, the internet was designed NOT to be centralised, so it goes against what the internet is designed to do by making it centralised. The is power hungry to keep there internet - by doing so it risks segregating the net as other countries start taking the matter into their own hands. The US does NOT own the net infratructure in other countries, so why should they be in control?

Originally posted by crucialx
Please tell me why the US should have control over other countries internet. They are owned and built by other countries, NOT by the US. The US will not "loss" control, there will be simply more counties who have a say in matters that deal with the internet.

This is not a "who built it first" matter, its not about that - the US has clearly done that. Its matter of distribution and working together, the internet was designed NOT to be centralised, so it goes against what the internet is designed to do by making it centralised. The is power hungry to keep there internet - by doing so it risks segregating the net as other countries start taking the matter into their own hands. The US does NOT own the net infratructure in other countries, so why should they be in control?

All ICANN has control over is what they created. A great case in point would be China. Any place is welcome to use any set of protocols and standards that they would like to. They are also welcome to develope their own DNS system and put it into place. The UN could do all of this as well if they wanted to, nothing is stopping them from doing it.

It's much like the difference between beta and VHS. VHS became what everybody used, and so did what we call "the internet" today.

Originally posted by crucialx
Please tell me why the US should have control over other countries internet. They are owned and built by other countries, NOT by the US. The US will not "loss" control, there will be simply more counties who have a say in matters that deal with the internet.

This is not a "who built it first" matter, its not about that - the US has clearly done that. Its matter of distribution and working together, the internet was designed NOT to be centralised, so it goes against what the internet is designed to do by making it centralised. The is power hungry to keep there internet - by doing so it risks segregating the net as other countries start taking the matter into their own hands. The US does NOT own the net infratructure in other countries, so why should they be in control?

Uhh... the US has "control" over other countries internet because other countries choose to use the US's system. If you dont like it, get out. Make your own.

You know, with an attitude like that, one day, pleople might just take you up on it.

The US has control, because they claimed it, other countried didnt choose the us, they choose the internet.

How about every host that is not us based gets together and starts there own internet and refuses to let the usa in, maybe then we would be happy.

I dont think it should be controled by any country, its a global system, and therefore should be globally controled.

Originally posted by awibble
You know, with an attitude like that, one day, pleople might just take you up on it.

The US has control, because they claimed it, other countried didnt choose the us, they choose the internet.

How about every host that is not us based gets together and starts there own internet and refuses to let the usa in, maybe then we would be happy.

I dont think it should be controled by any country, its a global system, and therefore should be globally controled.

Again I stress that they are more than welcome to take us up on it, but to be honest without arogance that won't happen anytime soon and even if it did it really wouldn't matter too much anyways. Believe it not there happens to be a huge amount of different networks, naming systems, and protocols that are different than the ones used by internet. These all just run through a gateway of some sort (generally speaking) in order to connect to the internet.

The US never claimed the internet. To claim it would be like somebody else making it and the US comming and taking control over it. What you're proposing is just the opposite. The US created it and you want somebody else to come and take it.

Now even if all of Europe and Asia were to get together and make their own internet the simple need for ecommerce and communications with the United States would prevent any real trouble from happening.

You also seem to be implying that you are not happy with the way the internet is currently run. I am curious what you don't like about it?

Also I would sugest this for some good reading: http://www.icann.org/new.html

ICANN may be in the US, but they are not the US ;)

Originally posted by awibble
You know, with an attitude like that, one day, pleople might just take you up on it.

The US has control, because they claimed it, other countried didnt choose the us, they choose the internet.

How about every host that is not us based gets together and starts there own internet and refuses to let the usa in, maybe then we would be happy.

I dont think it should be controled by any country, its a global system, and therefore should be globally controled.

Please do!

The US has control because IT IS THEIRS. They created it, they own it. It's as if you invented a flying car... but when everyone else in the world saw how cool it was, they demanded their own, because it "wasnt right" that you have control over the only flying car in the world. Some people might call that fair, others would probably call it magnificently stupid. Or perhaps they'd just call it "european." :rolleyes:

If you choose the internet, you choose the US. Create your own system of sharing information if you dont like it. Cant be bothered? Get off the internet. The only reason the system is "global" to begin with is because the US decided to let everyone else in on their invention. You should be thanking them, not complaining.

As i have said in previous posts, i am happy with the way it is run, i just dont like the fact that it is under US jurisdiction.

If you want to get really technical, who created the america you live in today? the french, the spanish, the english all had a large part to play.

Im not wanting to start a war over it, i just belive that it should be reviewed and placed under internatinal jurisdiction.

Yes it was 'invented' in america, but not all the people who worked on it where american.

As i keep saying, there is nothing wrong with the way it is run, but If it was under the conrol of the UK, do you think america would press for it to be under internatinal control? if it was under the control of europe, would the US press for it to be under internatinal control? The answer, weather you choose to accept it or not, is probably yes.

There are 2 sides to every argument.

I dont want an argument about it, a descussion would be nice, what do you think the advantages are to it been under US control?

I do see some, the advantages as i see it is that it works, and if it isnt broke dont fix it. However i see that there are advantages to be been under internatinal control. At the moment there are some counties that US companys are not allowed to deal with, now technically that says to me that us domain names (like .com) are not allowed to be sold to people in those countries, i dont think that is right.

What do you feel the advantages and disadvantages are? Maybe we can discuss this like adults, instead of telling people that have options to get off the internet?

Dicussion i dont mind, been told to get off the internet because i have a different option and im trying to express my views, i dont like .

You're comparing the founding of a nation by multiple current nations to the internet or are you trying to say that because origional "Americans" were from many different lands that the internet is already owned by the world? In the same breath it doesn't matter if all the people that created it were American or not as America is just a nation of nations (for lack of a better term).

Now that little bit aside I am not sure where you are trying to go with the fact that not everybody that created it was American. You seem to have the thought the ICANN is a government agency which it isn't. None of the people that worked hard to create what we call the internet today were told "Sorry, you're not American so you have no say in what is done anymore". This is not even about American or not, it's about creators or not .

I appreciate you saying that you don't want an arguement, but rather a discussion because I totally agree. I will appologize in advance if any of my comments come of as a personal attack, I assure you that they aren't.

In response to the quesiton of why I feel it should be under US control, I don't think it should. I think ICANN should control it because they were the ones that created it.

Now I can completely agree that there are benfitts to having control outside of US law (or any one countrie's laws), but I do not think that the UN should be the one deciding such a thing. I just do not agree with the majority of hte actions by the UN. That is getting into a political debate though and this is the wrong place for it.

In one of my posts further bvack in this thead, i think i said it doesnt have to be controled under UN 'laws' for lack of a better term, or maybe jurisdiction would be better, anyway i hope you can see my point.

I think somewhere i mentioned that a new global community for it could be created, maybe the UI (united Internet) or something like that could be created. Not only could they deal with domain names, but they could also, in the future, take over the current IP management to help better utlise the IP addresses that are not in use. I have read places that there are whole B class IP blocks that are allocated to basically defunct companys, and i heard somewhere that there are also some whole A class blocks that are allocated to companys that dont really need more than a C class block. but thats just digressing.

I do agree with you, the UN should not be the ones to take 'control' but in the same way, i do think that control should be more global.

It sounds like in many ways, we both agree, we have only just seen it :)

Anyway, the way i see it, no single nation should be able to have priority infulence over the internet. My option is that there should be a globalished community created for it. Maybe if each country chose a 'UI' representitive, who came together to form a system, it could work. Hope that explains my thoughts and options, and as i said, im happy to dicuss it, and hear other options :)

[EDIT]
Thinking about it i thought i would mention, i also dont mind the organisation been based in the USA, but be outside of USA jurisdiction is. (you know kinda like the airports work, once your inside them your not 'technically' inside the usa)

If you choose the internet, you choose the US. Create your own system of sharing information if you dont like it. Cant be bothered? Get off the internet. The only reason the system is "global" to begin with is because the US decided to let everyone else in on their invention. You should be thanking them, not complaining.

OK I am Scottish.

Stop driving on our "tarmac'd roads"
Stop feeding your children penicillin when their ill
Stop wearing raincoats
Stop driving on Pneumatic tyres
Stop driving Buicks

Above all


Stop talking bollox
;)

Oh yes and without a scot inventing the decimal point there would be no internet anyway.

Originally posted by Goldwing
OK I am Scottish.

Stop driving on our "tarmac'd roads"
Stop feeding your children penicillin when their ill
Stop wearing raincoats
Stop driving on Pneumatic tyres
Stop driving Buicks

Above all


Stop talking bollox
;)

Oh yes and without a scot inventing the decimal point there would be no internet anyway.

:eek:

By that logic: If youre black, get out of my country, because it was founded by white people. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

The "internet" is - in a very broad definition - the concept of fast, easy, efficient data sharing. The US was merely the first one to come up with a system for accessing this new informational frontier. They spent billions of dollars on making it what it is today. They came up with the protocols for letting computers talk to each other, they developed the software, they set the foundation.

The internet is your decimal point - ICANN is a math book.

There are many different types of math, and each does the same thing - manipulates data. Unfortunately, there's only one math book thus far for the internet - and thats the US (or ICANN, whatever).

In a perfect world everyone would get to hold hands and share every invention freely - but that kind of idealistic ******** just doesnt work when you factor in reality. The US built this system for its own benefit. It is theirs. Telling them how they should run their system is ignorant and pretentious. If you dont like how its run, create your own. Algebra... Trigonometry... Calculus... the world has found a lot of ways to manipulate the concept of a "decimal point." Likewise, im sure the world can find new ways to manipulate the internet if they feel its not suitable in its current form.

Monolith2,

Do you feel like actually discussing it, discussing the pros and cons, discussing the reasons why you feel it should stay where it is, and the resons you feel that it shouldnt be releaced as a true 'global entity'.

So far your comments seem extreamly harsh, and it appears that you dont want to talk about it, and you jsut want to keep repeating yourself.

As you can see, myself and justadollar hosting, although we thought we had different views, actually have much the same views when we started to talk about it, and not misinterprate and skip parts of what people where saying.


Why do you feel that the ICANN should remain under US control, and please dont jsut say because they created it, by that logic, many countrys would be dictating rules to the USA for things that you use everyday, but did not create. Can you not see the advantages on a global scale to having ICANN controled outside of US legislation?

Please lets have a discussion, not argument. We are all people afterall :)

Originally posted by Monolith2
:eek:

By that logic: If youre black, get out of my country, because it was founded by white people. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


The internet is your decimal point - ICANN is a math book.

There are many different types of math, and each does the same thing - manipulates data. Unfortunately, there's only one math book thus far for the internet - and thats the US (or ICANN, whatever).

In a perfect world everyone would get to hold hands and share every invention freely - but that kind of idealistic ******** just doesnt work when you factor in reality. The US built this system for its own benefit. It is theirs. Telling them how they should run their system is ignorant and pretentious. If you dont like how its run, create your own. Algebra... Trigonometry... Calculus... the world has found a lot of ways to manipulate the concept of a "decimal point." Likewise, im sure the world can find new ways to manipulate the internet if they feel its not suitable in its current form.

The post was a tongue in cheek remark obviously misplaced on you but never mind. The point was one of inventions are that inventions, concepts that have taken root and are realities.

On misconception you seem to be under is that ICANN ( or the US) is the internet - well low and behold that is not the case, two of the largest registries in the world UK and Germany are not part of ICANN and neither is hundreds of other ccTLD's. So maybe we have now created another "internet".

I suggest you read the story about pandora's box, because it has been opened and the US no longer holds the lid however much you would like it.

Originally posted by justadollarhostin
I think ICANN should control it because they were the ones that created it.

ICANN didn't create the 'net. They're just contracted by the Dep't.
of Commerce to oversee DNS. ;)

Originally posted by tree-host
Please lets have a discussion, not argument. We are all people afterall :)

We're having arguments here, if you think about it. At least it's
civilized. :D

Maybe it is time to let this thread wind down?

few more replies outside the subject and it will big time

Originally posted by davezan
ICANN didn't create the 'net. They're just contracted by the Dep't.
of Commerce to oversee DNS. ;)

I was awaiting a comment to come up like this. As good of a comment as it may be it opens up the need to explain such a huge technical undertaking that it would not even be worth it. If you want to be technical the Department of Commerce didn't create it either, the closest thing you could come to was the DoD in the United States. But they only started the idea, and the IANA (now taken over by ICANN) does not run the internet, but instead happen to be the ones that deal with the addresses and naming conventions. The internet is made up of many networks which are both privately and governemnt owned. Etc....

Originally posted by crucialx


Read above: distributed. There should be no centralised control.



BINGO!

And the interesting thing is, it already is, by design from the start. The internet was designed as a federated network, with each network being free to do what they wanted within the boundaries of their network. This whole issue arises because politicals do not grasp the concept of a distributed network, and they trend towards centralized power. This is nothing but a power and money grab. Not a control issue at all.


The US gave the world the InterNet protocols, mostly in the public domain. They also gave very liberal licencing on the reference implimentations. No other country has done such a massive gift.
Look at the thanks... fighting over what already is a non issue if you read the RFCs and think about it.

Remeber the world goverment body cometing standards? The world killer OSI potocal stacks, and the high fees to get to read the documents even, let alone buy code to run that used it? Didn't think so. Why try to return to the model that was the failure already, if we wanted that model whey did it lose then when it was the one that had all the press and was in all the government purchase orders first?

Originally posted by tree-host
Monolith2,

Do you feel like actually discussing it, discussing the pros and cons, discussing the reasons why you feel it should stay where it is, and the resons you feel that it shouldnt be releaced as a true 'global entity'.

So far your comments seem extreamly harsh, and it appears that you dont want to talk about it, and you jsut want to keep repeating yourself.

As you can see, myself and justadollar hosting, although we thought we had different views, actually have much the same views when we started to talk about it, and not misinterprate and skip parts of what people where saying.


Why do you feel that the ICANN should remain under US control, and please dont jsut say because they created it, by that logic, many countrys would be dictating rules to the USA for things that you use everyday, but did not create. Can you not see the advantages on a global scale to having ICANN controled outside of US legislation?

Please lets have a discussion, not argument. We are all people afterall :)

The "pros and cons" are a moot point, though.

Ideally, id like to get a new car for free every year. Since i dont... should i bitch and moan about how unfair it is that some people can afford a new car every year, and i cant? Should i demand to be given the same treatment, even if i cant afford to pay for the car as others can?

Just because something isnt ideal doesnt mean you have the right to change it. In an ideal world, Microsoft would be a not-for-profit company creating software for the world for free, just because they want to help increase the worlds productivity. They dont. Should they be forced to?

ICANN is what it is. A US-backed, US-derived governing body that controls (very liberally, might i add) the system that the US created. Is it ideal? Of course not. Very few things ever are. But is it fair? Yes.

And what things do you believe the US uses every day that they would not otherwise have had this argument been applied to them?

Originally posted by Goldwing
The post was a tongue in cheek remark obviously misplaced on you but never mind. The point was one of inventions are that inventions, concepts that have taken root and are realities.

On misconception you seem to be under is that ICANN ( or the US) is the internet - well low and behold that is not the case, two of the largest registries in the world UK and Germany are not part of ICANN and neither is hundreds of other ccTLD's. So maybe we have now created another "internet".

I suggest you read the story about pandora's box, because it has been opened and the US no longer holds the lid however much you would like it.

If the US no longer "holds the lid," then what are you complaining about? You want the US to relinquish control of... nothing? Are you being tongue-in-cheek again, or just hypocritical?

Regardless...

As i said 2 posts previous to this, i do NOT think ICANN = the internet. Rather, ICANN is a doorway to the internet. It's a doorway that everyone - US citizen or not - has chosen to use. The protocols used to exchange information across the internet of 2005 are the same that were used decades ago. It's the same old doorway. Surely after that many years there are better methods? More innovative approaches?

The internet is not one length of wire or one rack of servers. It is an idea. It's a concept of information sharing and communication. The US was merely the first to build a system that could access it. This system is engrained in every piece of computer hardware and software in the world today - yet the only piece the US still has any control over is the domain naming system. Everything else, 99% of it, is completely open to manipulation and modification.

Yet instead of the world thanking the US for this system; instead of thanking the US for making their system public for every person in the world to use, free of charge... the world responds with complaints and hatred about how horrible and dictatorial the US is for retaining the smallest bit of control over its own system. And you wonder why so many americans seem to take such a harsh stance against europe...? You wonder why americans seem so arrogant?

It's a mystery sure to rival that of Pandora's, no?

Originally posted by jbw
BINGO!

And the interesting thing is, it already is, by design from the start. The internet was designed as a federated network, with each network being free to do what they wanted within the boundaries of their network. This whole issue arises because politicals do not grasp the concept of a distributed network, and they trend towards centralized power. This is nothing but a power and money grab. Not a control issue at all.


The US gave the world the InterNet protocols, mostly in the public domain. They also gave very liberal licencing on the reference implimentations. No other country has done such a massive gift.
Look at the thanks... fighting over what already is a non issue if you read the RFCs and think about it.

Remeber the world goverment body cometing standards? The world killer OSI potocal stacks, and the high fees to get to read the documents even, let alone buy code to run that used it? Didn't think so. Why try to return to the model that was the failure already, if we wanted that model whey did it lose then when it was the one that had all the press and was in all the government purchase orders first?

Excellent comments.

We arnt trying to force them to change, we are expressing our views.

Sounds like even tho you tell people to like it or get off the internet, you agree with the view that it should be globally 'controled'

Originally posted by tree-host

Sounds like even tho you tell people to like it or get off the internet, you agree with the view that it should be globally 'controled'

Thats precisely my point. Allow me to go off on a bit of a tangent, which (i hope) will illuminate my point by the end...

Think of communism. If you read Marx, communism truly sounds like a spectacular idea. A true perfection of humanity, civilization, and community. Everyone working together for the greater good, everyone pooling their resources together and working towards one cohesive goal. A billion-strong workhorse of human ingenuity and endurance.

Yet, of course, the one thing Marx forgot about (or rather, Lenin) was that he was dealing with humans. Real humans, not idealistic charicatures that had no negative charicteristics. A government founded on the idea that you should ignore one entire half of the human experience - that a person will not always do whats best - was doomed to failure from the start.

It would be wonderful if every invention, every advance, every innovation that humanity produced was made freely available to the worlds population. It would be wonderful if everything always went right. It would be wonderful if we always got our way. It would be wonderful if we were always happy. But that is not the life you lead. To be human is to know that life is not always ideal... and that attempting to force utopia, to force perfection, is an effort in futility. By our very nature it is an impossibility.

Compare this to the topic at hand. It would, of course, be a wonderful thing to have global, shared control of "the internet" and everything related to it. The images conjured up of global harmony and equality are wonderful. But realistically: The US created it, the US owns it, the US let the world use it. Asking someone to give up their property for the "good of the world" isnt likely to fly when youre talking about your neighbors savings account or Donald Trump's Citation jet. Similarly, it's not going to fly with the US and ICANN.

I do, and dont get me wrong, see your point...

Doesnt mean that i dont still think that it should be globally controled :)

EDIT: nevermind

If the US no longer "holds the lid," then what are you complaining about? You want the US to relinquish control of... nothing? Are you being tongue-in-cheek again, or just hypocritical?

No remember not all escaped from pandora's box - something was left and what the US is clinging to.


The internet is not one length of wire or one rack of servers. It is an idea. It's a concept of information sharing and communication. The US was merely the first to build a system that could access it.

Exactly, you cannot trademark, copyright or patent an "idea" or a "concept" so why should a system that is globally used have to be controlled from within one country.

Yet instead of the world thanking the US for this system; instead of thanking the US for making their system public for every person in the world to use, free of charge... the world responds with complaints and hatred about how horrible and dictatorial the US is for retaining the smallest bit of control over its own system. And you wonder why so many americans seem to take such a harsh stance against europe...? You wonder why americans seem so arrogant?

For a country that stands on the platform of freedom then you have a funny notion of what that means ( are you a politician by any chance :stickout: ) Freedom does not mean retaining a big stick so you can inflict your own version of freedom of choice when that choice does not match your own.

Overall it is like America invented the wheel, allowed eveyone to use this marvellous invention and then when pneumatic tyres were added by someone else want to be able to control where and when and what type can be fitted, - do you expect the rest of the world to remain happy about that ? would that be dictatorial and arrogant?

Originally posted by Goldwing
Overall it is like America invented the wheel, allowed eveyone to use this marvellous invention and then when pneumatic tyres were added by someone else want to be able to control where and when and what type can be fitted,

Interesting analogy

:eek:

Other countries do have a say in how the internet is run. ICANN policy is decided using input from all registrars, including those in other countries. They specifically have their meetings in a variety of countries, recently Argentina, South Africa and Rome, and will soon have a meeting in Canada, to allow people from all over the world to come and offer their opinion on policies.

Originally posted by BrookeM
Other countries do have a say in how the internet is run. ICANN policy is decided using input from all registrars, including those in other countries. They specifically have their meetings in a variety of countries, recently Argentina, South Africa and Rome, and will soon have a meeting in Canada, to allow people from all over the world to come and offer their opinion on policies.

Perhaps you would like to read this.
http://www.nominet.org.uk/content/files/IcannLetterPdf.pdf

Also available directly from the Nominet site - linked on the hompage.

Pay particular attention to the last paragraph in the letter it speaks a thousand words and totally counters your point above.
Offerring an opinion and being heard are two different things

Originally posted by BrookeM
Other countries do have a say in how the internet is run. ICANN policy is decided using input from all registrars, including those in other countries. They specifically have their meetings in a variety of countries, recently Argentina, South Africa and Rome, and will soon have a meeting in Canada, to allow people from all over the world to come and offer their opinion on policies.

I think they have meetings all over the world to justify the recent rate increase

;)

Originally posted by Goldwing
Perhaps you would like to read this.
http://www.nominet.org.uk/content/files/IcannLetterPdf.pdf

Also available directly from the Nominet site - linked on the hompage.

Pay particular attention to the last paragraph in the letter it speaks a thousand words and totally counters your point above.
Offerring an opinion and being heard are two different things

Any registrar would have that to say about ICANN, they don't treat registrars in the US any differently. That's just ICANN...my point was that they give all registrars the opportunity to have equal input in creating policy. The fact that they do not respond to individual inquiries from each registrar in a timely matter is not news. In fact, they aknowledge it themselves.

Originally posted by BrookeM
Any registrar would have that to say about ICANN, they don't treat registrars in the US any differently. That's just ICANN...my point was that they give all registrars the opportunity to have equal input in creating policy. The fact that they do not respond to individual inquiries from each registrar in a timely matter is not news. In fact, they aknowledge it themselves.

I think you missed the point, Nominet is not an ICANN registrar like in the US but a ccTLD registry ( note!! registry not registrar) of which ICANN initiated the contact looking to cement its world domination plans, didn't get the response it wanted so now goes cap in hand to the world registries for handouts and at the same time failing to maintain dialogue.

Dmaven - me thinks you are right ;)

Lawmakers urge U.S. to keep control of Web

Thursday, October 20, 2005; Posted: 10:58 a.m. EDT (14:58 GMT)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- U.S. lawmakers are urging the Bush administration to resist a push from other countries to shift control of the Internet to the United Nations, arguing that such a move would stifle innovation and free expression.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/10/20/congress.internet.reut/index.html

As an Internet Citizen, I totally agree...

as if the US have control over the web to keep?

No they don't.. They oversee a very small yet very neccesary part of it. An important part which doesn't need to be put in the middle of political and religious views. In reality ICANN is made up of people from many countries. It just happens to be overseen by and located in the US.

all in all i don think any political pushing from the US government would effect the ICANN since its made by lot of peopl from all around the world.

The internets are mine.

Originally posted by Goldwing
Originally posted by Monolith2


The internet is not one length of wire or one rack of servers. It is an idea. It's a concept of information sharing and communication. The US was merely the first to build a system that could access it.

Exactly, you cannot trademark, copyright or patent an "idea" or a "concept" so why should a system that is globally used have to be controlled from within one country.


Mmmm... yeah. Im guessing no one has ever accused you of thinking too much, eh?




Originally posted by Goldwing
Overall it is like America invented the wheel, allowed eveyone to use this marvellous invention and then when pneumatic tyres were added by someone else want to be able to control where and when and what type can be fitted, - do you expect the rest of the world to remain happy about that ? would that be dictatorial and arrogant?

Mmmm... no. Im tempted to just copy and paste the same comment i wrote above, but ill humor you.

Using the wheel example in a proper way would look something like this: America invents the wheel. The wheel is a tool which makes moving stuff really easy. Theres a bunch of different kinds of wheels, and a bunch of different ways to "roll stuff around." Yet instead of other people coming up with new ways to "roll stuff around," they bitch to the US that its not fair they control the wheel.

It's like fighting over a Model T Ford - it's old, it works, but there's plenty of other ways to do the same thing (and probably in much better ways).

With the internet, there are probably much better ways to organize the worlds information (TM Google :rolleyes: ), but Europe is too full of whiny, incompetent people who prefer to bitch untill they get what they want instead of innovating. The internet is at least 40 years old... do you really think the US got it right on the first try? I know, i know, the US does so much right its easy to see why the rest of the world might be so quick to compliment us on yet another success - but im not so sure.

Im guessing that if europe spent half the effort it currently spends arguing with the US over stupid, trivial, and insignificant topics that it could come up with a much better information-sharing system all together.

Originally posted by Monolith2

Mmmm... yeah. Im guessing no one has ever accused you of thinking too much, eh?

Come on now, how do you expect your comments to be taken seriously when you go to using a personal attack instead of searching for some facts or basis for your thoughts that the statement presented to you is false. You can not patent an idea or a concept in the manner that was being discussed. I dare you to find one patent on something that is as general as the internet. You can find them on specific pieces of hardware, but even then you are going to be limited.

Who had the patent on the mouse, keybaord, monitor, cpu, cd-rom, router, switch, hub, cat5 cable, etc...

I won't bother to quote your second blurb of text, and as much as I agree that ICANN should continue to have every bit of power that they current have, try not to throw out random sterotypes on different people without showing some shred of proof.

Unfortunately there are companies who patent obvious "ideas" such as the company who has the patent on subdomains.... And it wasn't even their idea. They just happened to be greedy enough to be the ones who filed for it. And unfortunately again they have the right to enforce it.

Originally posted by WannaBaHost
Unfortunately there are companies who patent obvious "ideas" such as the company who has the patent on subdomains.... And it wasn't even their idea. They just happened to be greedy enough to be the ones who filed for it. And unfortunately again they have the right to enforce it. Is that one obvious enough?

That is a great example to bring up. They did not patent the subdomain though, instead they took out a patent on the automatic creation of subdomains for users who did not own a domain name.

The Patent office has been known to not fully investigate patents quite often (same thing can be said of trademarks) which is why there is a specific set of events that take place to allow the people to protest against any patents and/or trademarks.

The EFF has even made that patent one of their top 10 that they plan to have destroyed, and with all my searching I have yet to see it enforced on any scale (large or small) save some mean letters to hosts.

Originally posted by Monolith2
Mmmm... yeah. Im guessing no one has ever accused you of thinking too much, eh?

Lost for words are we ?

Originally posted by Monolith2
Mmmm... no. Im tempted to just copy and paste the same comment i wrote above, but ill humor you.

Using the wheel example in a proper way would look something like this: America invents the wheel. The wheel is a tool which makes moving stuff really easy. Theres a bunch of different kinds of wheels, and a bunch of different ways to "roll stuff around." Yet instead of other people coming up with new ways to "roll stuff around," they bitch to the US that its not fair they control the wheel.

It's like fighting over a Model T Ford - it's old, it works, but there's plenty of other ways to do the same thing (and probably in much better ways).

Your quite adept at twisting meanings to suit yourself
It is like USA invented the round thing with a hole in the middle, the rest of the world took the concept and modified it, added their own bits to it ( not always successful) and now that the round thing with a hole in the middle is a complete product with global significance the USA which ignored what was going on for decades now want complete control of all aspects.


Originally posted by Monolith2
With the internet, there are probably much better ways to organize the worlds information (TM Google :rolleyes: ), but Europe is too full of whiny, incompetent people who prefer to bitch untill they get what they want instead of innovating. The internet is at least 40 years old... do you really think the US got it right on the first try? I know, i know, the US does so much right its easy to see why the rest of the world might be so quick to compliment us on yet another success - but im not so sure.

The world is full of whiny people with a significant number in the US, why do you single out Europe, the rest of the world is also involved I am not too keen on central EU policies myself.
I wil use an earlier example, as a Scot it was my country that invented penicillin, this was developed and given to the world, within a relatively short space of time this was modified and began the transformation to the range of anti biotic drugs that save the lives of millions around the world - there is similarities here, the US produced the basic plan which has now far exceeded what was initially "invented" this should not be in the control of one country or more importantly one political system.
If things had been different and some backward communist country had came up with the idea would you now be arguing for them to retain "ownership" - somehow I doubt it.

Originally posted by Monolith2
Im guessing that if europe spent half the effort it currently spends arguing with the US over stupid, trivial, and insignificant topics that it could come up with a much better information-sharing system all together.

You really have a problem with Europeans don't you - bordering on racism, perhpas we should all tip our forelocks to the obvious superiority that is America, be good little American colonists and be grateful for all the scraps that fall from your table (sic)

Perhaps you should consider whether you see the USA as a global economy or an insular self determined country that has a bee in its bonnet about people being out to get them bordering on paranoia.

Unfortunately there are companies who patent obvious "ideas" such as the company who has the patent on subdomains.... And it wasn't even their idea. They just happened to be greedy enough to be the ones who filed for it. And unfortunately again they have the right to enforce it.

I know little about this one - will make interesting reading but I do know that ideas and concepts cannot be patented else the patents system would be swamped with wanabee inventors- thanks justadollarhostin for a little insight into this

And just to spice things up:

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39232718,00.htm

In a sign that traditionally obscure discussions about Internet control have taken on new prominence, President Bush broached the topic in a meeting this week with European Commission President José Barroso.

Great find davezan

"One reason why businesses are alarmed is the lengthy list of suggestions that have been advanced by nations participating in the UN process. Those include new mandates for "consumer protection", the power to tax domain names to pay for "universal access", and folding the ICANN into a UN agency. The UN has previously suggested creating an international tax bureaucracy and once floated the idea of taxing email, saying in a report that a 1 cent tax on 100 messages would be "negligible."

And don't fool yourself once you have a crap load of hands in the cookie jar their won't be other suggestions of international taxes..

OK you win
If the EU want it then it can stay where it is, if anyone can bollox it up even more than the Americans it is those incompetent prats in Brussels
:stickout:

The US position is bipartisan. Democrats and Republicans in the US House of Representatives have sent Gross a letter urging him not to succumb to international pressure, and a US senator has introduced a nonbinding resolution that would protect the Net from hostile takeover at the summit in Tunisia.

Computer keyboards at dawn.