Editorial: Congress must stop international takeover of the internet
“if you cherish free expression, and free speech rights generally, you should be worried”
By Allen Payton, Publisher & Editor
I rarely write about national issues on the Herald website or newspaper, but this one is too important not to, as what could happen in the next few days could affect not only my business, but any and all internet-related media and any business and individual who uses the internet.
The Obama Administration supports allowing the international takeover of the internet, which was developed here in America, first by our military, and is currently controlled by American interests.
If that happens, some non-elected body made up mostly of representatives of foreign governments, which in general oppose and work against American interests and the freedoms we enjoy in our country, will be in control of the most powerful information and commerce tool ever created.
The UN could ultimately take control and it is not favorable to America and hasn’t been for years. Back in 1985 while working as an intern for then-U.S. Senator Pete Wilson in Washington, D.C., I had the opportunity to travel to New York over Thanksgiving weekend to visit a college buddy. He had to work the day after the holiday, so I spent it being a tourist in Manhattan.
One of my last stops was the United Nations building. While in the gift shop I met and struck up a conversation with a delegate from the U.S. State Department and asked him what his thoughts were on the institution. His response was rather eye-opening.
“This place is a joke,” he said. “It’s the U.S. and Israel against the world and once in awhile our old friend Great Britain will abstain.”
Well, things haven’t changed much in the 31 years since then, and actually they’ve become worse. While I believe it’s always better to talk things out than to fight them out, as the delegates to the UN spend much of their time doing in that deliberative body, the decisions they can make once they have control of the Internet could prove disastrous.
Let’s remember who some of the nation states that are members and their policies toward the Internet in their own countries. China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, just to name a few. Do we want their views, which are anathema to our God-given, constitutionally-protected freedoms of religion, speech, and the press be the ones governing or influencing how the Internet operates in our country? What about even England, Scotland or France, where certain comments that we consider disagreements and debate, can get you arrested for “hate speech”?
In a television interview on Wednesday, Ajit Pai, a senior member of the Federal Communications Commission, said “This proposal is to essentially give up the US oversight role that it’s had for the last 20 years, basically for the entire commercial lifespan of the Internet to a company called ICANN, which is an international organization, which includes a number of foreign countries.”
Pai further stated, “[I]f you cherish free expression, and free speech rights generally, you should be worried, I think, when there’s — this oversight role’s going to be ceded to potentially, foreign governments who might not share our values.”
This needs to be stopped and now.
Congress is debating the issue today and the change will occur on Saturday. Our representatives need to hear from us, now. Please join me in contacting them and urging them to vote to stop the Obama administration from transferring oversight of the internet to an international body.
Rep. Jerry McNerney
Washington, D.C. Office (202) 225-1947
Antioch Office (925) 754-0716
Stockton Office (209) 476-8552
Rep. Mark DeSaulnier
Washington, D.C. Office (202) 225-2095
Walnut Creek Office (925) 933-2660
Richmond Office (510) 620-1000
Senator Diane Feinstein
Washington, D.C. Office (202) 224-3841
San Francisco Office (415) 393-0707
Senator Barbara Boxer
Washington, D.C. Office (202) 224-3553
Oakland Office (510) 286-8537
So why does the Obama administration think this is good for the USA ?
this change is a good thing it will go alone way to make the internet a more open to every one .. all the folk who know nothing about the internet should just shut the hell up. What they should be yelling about is how most of the internet provider in america is over charging them for the service and how there no real competion of the service in most area of the country that something i can support , but this is a BS issue made up cause there is a Black man in the whitehouse. The way you know it a BS issue is Texas lawsuit to stop it on the ground of property right.. This the same state that wanted to leave the USA ..
Mr. Martel,
So you think this will help Americans get better pricing for internet access?
Then you play the race card because President Obama is on the one pushing it? How ridiculous and what an attempt at obfuscating the issue.
If you think the other nations of the world will support the freedoms we enjoy in our nation, that are protected by our U.S. Constitution, you really don’t understand what currently exists, internationally.
Besides, why would all the big internet companies, which already are exercising their own censorship, be supporting the transfer? Perhaps this is really about them making more money and having more control of the internet and its content at the expense of our freedom. Please see article, here – http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/09/30/internet_orgs_us_government_iana_icann/
But, it appears it may be too late anyway, as the Republican-controlled Congress failed to stop the transfer and the judge ruled against the lawsuit, yesterday. Of course, that decision can be appealed until the U.S. Supreme Court rules. http://thehill.com/policy/technology/298790-judge-rejects-attempt-to-stop-internet-oversight-transfer
In the meantime, please focus your discussion and debate of this matter on the real issues surrounding it and try to refrain from lowering yourself to the level of race-baiting.
Allen Payton, Publisher & Editor
Rick,
To answer your question, here’s an op-ed by Michael Beckerman, President & CEO of the Inernet Association, representing almost 40 major internet companies, explaining why the transfer is a good thing.
In it, Beckerman writes, “it is essential that participation in Icann be comprised of a diverse, international multistakeholder group whose members share the common goal of ensuring a free and open internet that fosters and spreads innovation across the globe.”
Read the his entire op-ed, here: http://www.wsj.com/articles/we-support-fccs-transfer-of-internet-power-1466520980
As stated in my editorial, the internet was created in the U.S., first by our government. Please see article about this – http://www.govtech.com/e-government/Who-Invented-the-Internet.html
Sowhy should the U.S. government relinquish oversight of something created using U.S. tax dollars and advanced, mainly by U.S. companies which enjoy tax deductions, to an international organization?
This was ICANN’s proposal brought to the Obama Administration, which is supported by the President.
The following article provides more background – http://fortune.com/2016/09/30/internet-oversight-transfer-saturday/
“The U.S. Department of Commerce is due to cede stewardship of ICANN, or the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, as scheduled” today, Saturday, October 1, 2016.
“ICANN, a California-based nonprofit, manages the database for top-level domain names such as .com and .net and their corresponding numeric addresses that allow computers to connect.
After the transfer, ICANN will be governed by a collection of academics, technical experts, private industry and government representatives, public interest advocates and individual users around the world, in what it calls a ‘multi-stakeholder process.’
Federal officials began discussing a plan to move ICANN under international oversight in the 1990s, and rolled out a formal plan in March 2014.
A delay would have backfired by undermining U.S. credibility in international negotiations over internet standards and security, the Obama administration and technical experts have said.
The transfer is ‘a symbolic, but important step in preserving the stability and openness of the Internet, which impacts free speech, our economy and our national security,’ Ed Black, chief executive of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, said in a statement.”
So, we’ll see if the challenge to the transfer is successful. If not, we shall see what the results are in the future with what we will and won’t be able to publish on the internationally-controlled internet, that would most likely, ultimately fall under U.N. control. What other international laws would govern it and who would determine those laws?
Allen