Russia Demands Internet Takeover By The UN... And Then Retracts It

from the look-at-that... dept

Quite a week for random governmental retractions. Back in February, when we first warned about the upcoming "World Conference on International Telecommunications" (WCIT) meeting of the UN's International Telecommunications Union (ITU), we noted that the thing to be most afraid of was countries like Russia and China using the process to take over control of aspects of the internet, in part to allow greater control for the sake of censorship, but also to set up questionable "tariffs" on internet traffic, designed to basically divert money to state owned or "closely associated" telcos. While much of the focus over the past few months was on the EU telcos proposal, you had to know that even worse was coming.

Last week, the Russians released their proposal, first in Russian and a few days later with an English translation to the ITU -- and both versions quickly leaked. You can download it from the Internet Archive or view the embed below. It is a pretty blatantly bad document. Larry Downes, over at News.com, has a pretty thorough analysis of the document and why it's troubling. Here's a snippet:
The leaked proposal would strongly endorse national control over those parts of the Internet that reside within a country's borders, including ISPs, traffic, and engineering. One suggested change to the treaty, for example, declares that "Member States shall have the sovereign right to manage the Internet within their national territory, as well as to manage national Internet domain names."

Russia is also calling for a major revision to the multi-stakeholder governance process that has long-presided over domain names and Internet addressing, which it calls a "critical transnational resource." Under a proposed revision, the treaty would be amended to make clear that "Member States shall have equal rights in the international allocation of Internet addressing and identification resources."

Today, oversight of domain names and IP addresses is delegated to ICANN, a nongovernmental organization, which manages key Internet resources through a complex mechanism. According to ICANN, its model is "bottom up" and includes "registries, registrars, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), intellectual property advocates, commercial and business interests, noncommercial and nonprofit interests, representation from more than 100 governments, and a global array of individual Internet users."

The ITU, by contrast, allows only its member nations to vote. Private organizations can participate in its proceedings by paying a large annual fee but cannot propose amendments or vote.
This isn't a surprise... but it is a clear problem:
Curbing the Internet is a priority for these countries that goes well beyond the WCIT process. China, for example, recently hosted its first annual "Internet Roundtable for Emerging Countries," attended by Russia, Brazil, India, and South Africa. According to observers of the meeting, the participants agreed that "The Internet must be managed by governments, with a particular focus on the influence of social networks on society."

The Russian proposal, however, is the most audacious power grab to date. And it comes as little surprise to observers of the ITU, which has deepened ties to Russia in a bid to demonstrate its relevance in cybersecurity. Last year, during a meeting between Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Toure, Putin bluntly told Toure that Russia was keen on the idea of "establishing international control over the Internet using the monitoring and supervisory capability of the International Telecommunications Union."
Of course, a funny thing happened over the weekend... In talking to people familiar with the matter, we found out that days after the Russian proposal went live, they pulled it and submitted a "revised" version. Right now it's Russian only, so people are waiting for the ITU's translators to dig in, but we're hearing from people who understand Russian that the new version is slightly better than the original, but still has significant problems.

Meanwhile, Downes piece also has two ridiculous tidbits about just how out of touch and clueless the ITU is. Earlier this month, we wrote about an editorial in Wired by ITU boss Hamadoun Toure in which he explained why the UN should regulate the internet. Downes points out that the title of that article was changed from "UN Must Regulate the Internet" to "UN: We Seek to Bring Internet to All." Quite different, though it's unclear who came up with the headline. The bigger issue, however, is that part of Toure's insistence that the ITU process is an "open" one relies on the existence of the WCIT Public Views and Opinions page, where people could submit their opinions -- and he encouraged people to do so. Only problem? At the time Toure's piece was published, the ITU had already turned off the ability to add new comments.
A link directed readers to the WCIT 12 "Public Views and Opinions" page, which, since it was created in July, has received only 15 posts.

But perhaps that's because the ITU required commenters to first register, provide extensive identifying information, and agree to a lengthy terms of service agreement before they could "express their views" on the contents of a single, and highly redacted, early draft of the proposals the ITU decided to release. (The complete document, as well as many more recent versions, are available on WCITLeaks.)

Or perhaps that's because, as one of Wired's reader's pointed out, the "Public Views and Opinions" page had actually been shut down before Toure's editorial was even published.

Weeks ahead of the conference, and just as some of the worst proposals are leaking out of the ITU's information fortress, the public comment page now reads solemnly: "We inform you that the WCIT-12 Open Consultation process is now closed."

That statement captures, in a nutshell, everything that's wrong with the WCIT, and the ITU's pathetic effort to spin it.
Why is it even a discussion for the ITU to try to take more control over the internet when they clearly have no clue?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Michael Barclay (profile), Nov 19th, 2012 @ 3:39pm

    They were for it before they were against it!

    Wow, this is almost as good as . . . the Republican Study Committee being in favor of real copyright reform, before they were against it!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 19th, 2012 @ 3:45pm

    Re: They were for it before they were against it!

    Rick Perry moved to Russia?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Beech, Nov 19th, 2012 @ 3:57pm

    Because

    "Why is it even a discussion for the ITU to try to take more control over the internet when they clearly have no clue?"

    Because TERRORISM
    Because CHILD PORN
    Because LEGACY TELECOS ARE BEING COMPETED AGAINST
    Because COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
    Because NEED MORE STUFF TO BE IN CHARGE OF FOR MORE $$$$$

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    Alana (profile), Nov 19th, 2012 @ 4:56pm

    Re: Because

    Because reasons.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    MHab, Nov 19th, 2012 @ 5:29pm

    Re: Because

    Because PICKLES

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Digitari, Nov 19th, 2012 @ 5:31pm

    Re: Because

    what about touch screens, how sexy is that!?!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 19th, 2012 @ 9:03pm

    Re: Re: Because

    Stupid sexy touch screens.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 2:25am

    the thing that is to me equally worrying is that, yet again, things want to be done, in secret, by another clueless, but self appointed and self interested body. we can thank the USA for all of this type of crap! had they not have started having these secret, industry only meetings over the internet, with no oversight and no participation from the public allowed, perhaps what is now happening wouldn't be happening! as per usual though, because this is not what the US wants (it wants to do exactly what ITU is trying to do, ie, take control of the internet for it's own purposes and screw everywhere/everyone else), it's bad. if, however, the USA was going to get the control instead, it would be the dogs bollocks of an idea and it is doing it's best to get that to happen in the usual 'do what we say or else' threatening attitude. the latest 'victim' is Thailand and i doubt it will have the sense or the guts to say NO!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 4:06am

    Re:

    yep, its called the cybersecurity bill.......mass control and misinformation, in order to "align" the publics thoughts with theirs.....and only theirs

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 4:09am

    The closest thing we have/had to a free market was the internet, from its beginings.......seems like gober'ments let this one through the cracks

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Aardvark, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 7:25am

    Frankly if these countries want control of the Internet they should go out and develop their own closed version of it. Whether or not they like it, the United States invented and paid for the development of the Internet and gave it to the world. Why should we know turn control of it over to countries that had absolutely nothing to do with its beginnings?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Dave, Nov 20th, 2012 @ 11:02am

    Re:

    "The United States invented and paid for the development of the Internet and gave it to the world" ? That's not what I've heard!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    icon
    Tex Arcana (profile), Nov 22nd, 2012 @ 11:58am

    Re: Re: Because PICKLES

    [IMG]http://i46.tinypic.com/2n8vlh2.jpg[/IMG]
    http://i46.tinypic.com/2n8vlh2.jpg

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    Tex Arcana (profile), Nov 22nd, 2012 @ 11:59am

    Those pesky Russians, always trying to make another Soviet!

    Oh, snap: the US is trying to do the same thing...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This