Do We Really Want Intellectual Ventures And Disney 'Governing' The Internet?

from the don't-think-so dept

The United Nations recently announced the lateset members to its “multistakeholder advisory group” on the issue of “internet governance.” As they state, there are 56 members in the group, 33 of which are new. Considering that this is a group that is supposedly planning to act as stakeholders for “governing” the internet, you would hope that it would actually be representative of, you know, internet users. In fact, the press release from the UN states:

“The Advisory Group members are from all stakeholder groups and all regions, representing Governments, the private sector, civil society, academia and technical communities.”

But when you look down the actual list, a different story appears. It looks like the list is pretty much dominated by government “IP” officials, as well as people from telcos, and then people in the domain name registration field. And then there’s an exec from the world’s largest patent trolling firm, Intellectual Ventures. Oh, and the VP of Global Public Policy Europe for Disney. Because I’m sure we’re all comfortable letting Disney determine how the internet should be governed. Are these really the people we want “governing” the internet? There is at least someone from ISOC (the Internet Society), but I’m having a hard time seeing this as a group of people who should actually represent the public in terms of “governing” the internet.

Filed Under: , ,
Companies: disney, intellectual ventures

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Do We Really Want Intellectual Ventures And Disney 'Governing' The Internet?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Do We Really Want Intellectual Ventures And Disney ‘Governing’ The Internet?

They already govern the people through purchased control of the “highest offices”. And like television, mail, telephone, radio, telegraph, smoke signals and many others, the Internet is just an advertising and sales medium.

So who cares? Look! Shiny object ….

Mr. Smarta** (profile) says:

How it begins...

This is how it all begins. The New World Order is beginning to take its place among the nations. The One World Government is starting with the powerful in America and is reaching out to rule all of the nations. Not one government anywhere can defend its people or its property. Soon, we shall all be slaves. America is coming to rule all of the nations. The biggest nations will fall first, and the smaller ones after.

“Intellectual Property” is the smoke screen that comes before the attack. Nobody will be safe. Have a nice day!

Anonymous Coward says:

and all the common sense comments and/or complaining wont change a thing! the public are totally discounted from anything and everything until it comes to shelling out cash! all other sectors are not only represented, they completely take over, dictating what is only in their best interests, provided there is no costs involved! bunch of selfish, self centered hypocrites!

Skeptical Cynic (profile) says:

Control is based on two things...

First control the means to get good and services that are needed…Done.

Second control the information that is given to the people to shape the thoughts and their needs…Getting close.

As all good controlists we start with the slogan of Forward.

Their words :

Designerfx (profile) says:

there's a difference between financially interested parties and stakeholders

how hard is it to understand the difference?

on one hand you have:
people focused on making money

on the other hand you have:
people responsible for (service) being maintained, long term, etc.

how hard is it to understand that these groups are absolutely not ever necessarily correlated?

:Lobo Santo (profile) says:

Ready.... Fight!

(to play devil’s advocate–I don’t believe this argument)

Well, one could argue that streets, power-lines, water-pipes, television broadcast frequencies, and telephone lines are all corporate controlled and government controlled and they still maintain quite a modicum of utility (no pun) for quite a few people.

So the internet will join its other utility brethren in the chains and shackles mediocrity and inept corporate whoring–what’s wrong with that? Is it right that the internet gets to remain free while everything else is regulated and whored to death??

So remember, don’t ask “why lock it up?”; ask “why isn’t it locked up like everything else?”


Oh, almost forgot: freetard pirate fag noobs pudgy kittens apologist raporist magnificent bastards.

Thomas (profile) says:


“Government IP officials” are merely employees of the entertainment industry who are “working” for the government. The whole thing is simply a corporate attempt to block “piracy”, which is simply impossible. I am pretty sure that there are zero people in the group who have the slightest interest in the rights of consumers; all consumers are assumed to be thieves.

DannyB (profile) says:

They couldn't stop the printing press

They won’t stop the Internet either.


See part 3 Intellectual Property.
Subsection: History of Copyright.

She shared the concern of the Catholic Church over the printing press. The public?s ability to quickly distribute information en masse was dangerous to her ambitions to restore Catholicism, in particular their ability to distribute heretic material. (Political material, in this day and age, was not distinguishable from religious material.) Seeing how France had failed miserably in banning the printing press, even under threat of hanging, she realized another solution was needed. One that involved the printing industry in a way that would benefit them as well.

She devised a monopoly where the London printing guild would get a complete monopoly on all printing in England, in exchange for her censors determining what was fit to print beforehand. It was a very lucrative monopoly for the guild, who would be working hard to maintain the monopoly and the favor of the Queen?s censors. This merger of corporate and governmental powers turned out to be effective in suppressing free speech and political-religious dissent.

Anonymous Coward says:

If I look at the list I see even more scary people:
A person from childnet (Protection of children on http://www... I can only assume she will be a hardliner)

A person from Chinese government (representing the worlds most monitored internet)

A person from EBU (mostly TV-broadcaster in europe. No doubt close friends of the film industry in the fight against piracy)

A person from Abu-Ghazaleh Intellectual Property (lawyers for hire in certain countries. Primary speciality is protection of IP)

What is truely lacking is people with knowledge about human rights.

Rich Kulawiec (profile) says:

They've got to be kidding

I just read the list, and recognized one name — Wendy Seltzer (whose blog is worth following, by the way). She’s a lawyer and has done outstanding work on behalf of netizens.

But I don’t see any network engineers, system administrators, security researchers, software developers, RFC authors, academic researchers — you know, the people who actually built and run and study the Internet. I do see quite a few bureaucrats, politicians, and industry insiders.

So, ummm, no. In fact: hell no.

PlagueSD says:

The Internet is a “communications” medium. The big companies want to change it to a “broadcast” medium so they can continue thier propaganda and control of the “media”

Once Government can “take down” anything they want we lose our 1st amendment right of free speech…Next is going to be the Gestapo marching down our streets!!

Baldaur Regis (profile) says:

They couldn't stop the printing press

“She shared the concern of the Catholic Church over the printing press.”

“She breathlessly shared the concern of the Catholic Church over the printing press, her hand idly caressing the brass platens, feeling the throbbing potential of the massive machine beside her.”

History just sounds so much better rewritten in the Daily Mail style. I don’t know, maybe I’m spending too much time here following links.

Anonymous Coward says:

How it begins...

Good news for you wing nut, Dollar Days is having a dale on extra heavy duty tin foil. Perhaps you can taking advantage of the special shipping offer where they’ll drop it from a black helicopter right outside the basement door of your Mom’s house. You’re welcome!!!

DC (profile) says:


You all must have been up late last night. Usually at least one troll or shill shows up within minutes of a post.

Them = perpetual control = no use by the public ever.

Not them = let popular and even unpopular culture be free to enter the general culture at some reasonable point.

Nothing socialist in option 2. Option 1 is definitely fascist.

Yes, it is a false dichotomy, but closer to reality than yours.

I’m pretty sure there is never anything honest in your engagement here.

varagix says:

How it begins...

Anyone else find this post oddly optimistic? I mean believing that not only will our government -not- bankrupt itself, possibly dragging a number of other actors (industries, citizenry, dependent nations) with it, but to also believe that it will rule the world?

Seriously, what’s the NWO’s plan? Make the rest of the western world dependent on US currency, crash its value, then bum rush the rest of the world with the US military before our servicemen’s inflation-adjusted salaries are due?

Why not just nuke them: it’d be faster and the political fallout would be much less. Granted the -nuclear- fallout would be much higher…

Josef Anvil (profile) says:


Looked at the list and it doesn’t appear as if that group can agree on much at all. IP lawyers and repressive regimes, niiiiice.

Yes there are a few names including IV and Disney that absolutely do not belong on the list. Actually anyone involved in IP law doesn’t belong on any internet governance panel. The telcos should be there and the cable companies and probably Intel and HP or even Apple before Disney and IV.

Then again, maybe a lot more technology people should start writing IP law.

UN Lover (not!) says:

UN Human Rights Council and internet freedom

Well, it looks like the UN’s “multistakeholder advisory group” on the issue of “internet governance” will be about freedom and fairness on the internet to exactly the same degree that the UN Human Rights Council is about human rights!

If Kaddafi, Assad, Erdojan, North Korea and China can each have a vote equal to Canada when deciding about human rights for the world, they why can’t Disney, Iran and the Chinese government assure freedom on the internet? What a absolutely lovely idea, all working together for shared values!

Don’t forget, by the way, that it was US President Barak Obama who made the staunch decision for the US to rejoin the wonderful UN Human Rights Council. A wise decision by a man of great morality.


Anonymous Coward says:

Control is based on two things...

“Second control the information that is given to the people to shape the thoughts and their needs…Getting close.”

They had that one down, with the media companies and all, well, until the internet showed up and fucked up their plans

our last best hope…….in a universe far far away…. im kidding…..well, the last bit, anyway

Locutus (profile) says:

Mickey Rat

I’ve dealt with all stripes of humans in a half-century of being dragged behind the pickup truck of life. By far the most evil, most conniving, greediest, lowest scum-dwelling bastards were Disney whags, usually fueled by cocaine and the loving attention of sniveling, adoring young boys. Disney consumes any actual talent and dedication the way flesh-eating virus eats skin, without regard for any long-term mutual benefit…it’s all about this week’s profits, and to hell with everything else! Mickey makes for an excellent RAT; I only have pity for misguided parents who pound the worship of Disney into their young children, in lieu of anything in the world that may be substantial or enlightening.

AzureSky (profile) says:

How it begins...

funny but, walt wasnt the evil one, if you look at how disney has acted since his death and even during his life after he was out of direct control, he would be sick.

he said for example many times he always wanted the price to get into disney parks to be affordable for any American family, if you go check the prices now days, 1 person getting full access is more then a family would cost in his day…even considering inflation.

walt wasnt a fuzzy nice guy, but he wasnt as psychopathic as his successors have been.

he was also a bit of an anti-govt nut from what i have read, he didnt trust the govt,and in some of the designs of his structures and parks it shows, built like bunkers(thick metal doors and such)

just saying, walt isnt the problem anymore then old mr walton was with walmart(he was an honest nice guy by all accounts, unlike his kids who made walmart into what it is today)

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...