China Hails ITU Internet Takeover By Blowing Its Favorite Trumpet: Distrusting The US

from the one-way-of-looking-at-it dept

While there's been plenty of talk about the upcoming ITU process, the ITU keeps attempting to downplay what it's trying to do -- and insisting that Russia, China and other regimes aren't looking to use the process to clamp down on the internet. Of course, proposal leaks from Russia suggest otherwise. As for China, Dave Farber points us to an editorial in the People's Daily newspaper in China from back in August that argues that the ITU process is necessary to wrest control of the internet away from the US.
This indicated the U.S. decision to retain ultimate control over the global Internet, which enabled it to unilaterally close the Internet of another country. A suddenly paralyzed Internet would definitely cause huge social and economic losses to the country.

More and more countries are beginning to question the U.S. control over the world’s Internet as the international resource should be managed and supervised by all countries together. However, the United States has conducted a pre-emptive strike, and refused to give up control over the Internet in the name of protecting the resource. The refusal reflects its hegemonic mentality and double standards.

The United States controls and owns all cyberspaces in the world, and other countries can only lease Internet addresses and domain names from the United States, leading to the U.S. hegemonic monopoly over the world’s Internet.
This is an exaggeration of reality. While ICANN has serious problems -- which we frequently discuss here -- that doesn't mean that dumping it entirely in favor of a ridiculously secretive and bureaucratic process like the ITU makes sense. The article goes on to cite the US apparently turning off the .iq domain for Iraq during the invasion in 2003. Of course, that's an interesting rewriting of history. The issue with the .iq domain wasn't quite as cut and dried as the editorial implies. First of all, .iq wasn't a widely used domain no matter what. But, more importantly, it was entirely managed and controlled by a guy in Texas who was accused of funding terrorists and eventually sentenced to 84 months in jail. It wasn't so much a case of the US government running to ICANN and saying shut down the domain, as it was a criminal investigation into separate issues that happened to scoop up the one guy who controlled the TLD. And, it should be noted that ICANN gave .iq back to the Iraqi government years ago.

This kind of stuff indicates the lengths to which the Chinese government seems willing to go to prop up the ITU process for taking over aspects of internet governance: they'll just lie and make up stories when the truth isn't particularly convenient.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 3:38am

    I don't trust China or the US.

     

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

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 3:40am

    but dont anyone else think that the US aids in this opinion when it continues to do as it did yesterday, and shut down websites (132 this time), without any form of checking or giving the owners any chance to defend themselves. it also doesn't matter that the sites may not be US sites either! if the US wants to stop this type of condemnation of how it is perceived as the controller of the internet, it needs to stop taking control of the internet! it isn't rocket science, is it!
    does anyone in their right mind that buys an item at a fraction of the real price, actually think they are buying the genuine article? of course not! does anyone in their right mind think that closing down a website or a shop that sells counterfeit/imitation goods means that the buyers are going to go and buy the genuine item instead? of course not! all that happens is that those that were buying the non-genuine articles buy something else, but lose their little bit of fantasy. those making the non genuine items lose their jobs, they have less money, things dont get bought, taxes dont get paid. it ends up as a lose-lose situation except for the satisfaction law enforcement get from fucking something else up. buying 'knock-offs' hardly constitute lives. by going after those people instead of real criminals could do.

     

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

  3.  
    icon
    Mesonoxian Eve (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 3:42am

    Hmm. If the US truly controlled the internet, then someone explain how the Great Firewall of China can exist.

    I ask because we know the US hates that wall (because they can't break into it and steal secrets).

     

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

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 3:44am

    It's always good to have China backing you up. Now ITU guys will be like - "SEE! China supports our ideas..so that means they are good!"

    Wait what?!

     

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

  5. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:00am

    What a terrible article.

    Your fear mongering of China and Russia does nothing for your argument. You deliberately mislead the reader by failing to properly present the ITU - a United Nations agency which includes 193 nation states and is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. So yes, while China and Russia are members, so to is the United States. If control of domains were handed over to the ITU the United States would still have a say, but could no longer dominate.


    Also, your excuses for the .iq domain seizure are incredibly weak. All this proves is that the US can arbitrarily and preemptively seize domains as they see fit. Whether the evidence of this terrorist affiliation was manufactured or not, the entire domain was seized at a time it was advantageous for the United States. This is unacceptable, and reason alone for a transfer domain operations to ITU.

     

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

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:04am

    Re:

    No, the US hates it because it works in part.

     

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

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:06am

    Re:

    Actually, the Chinese may have a valid point with regards to trusting that the US Government has the best interests of all at heart. However, that does not mean that the suggestion has ulterior motives on China's behalf.

     

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

  8.  
    icon
    Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:06am

    I don't trust China, the US, the ITU, the wider UN, the UK or any number of countries or organisations whose agenda is the oppression of their citizens.

     

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

  9.  
    identicon
    Beech, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:09am

    I don't like the fact that it's even POSSIBLE to debate who should control the internet. All this whole discussion tells me is that we need a new internet, even more decentralized, anonymous, untraceable, and impossible to be put under the thumb of any one entity.

     

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

  10.  
    icon
    Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:16am

    Re:

    Oh if the ITU get their way with this Internet, it is only a matter of time before someone comes up with a new one.

     

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

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:35am

    Re:

    ICANN != US government.

    The internet has prospered under ICANNs pseudo control and the ITU will only make things worse.

    Like they say, 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it!'.

     

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

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:35am

    Re: Response to ITU cheerleader pep rally

    What a terrible comment.

    Your blissful bending over for the ITU does nothing for your argument. You deliberately mislead the reader by failing to properly present the ITU - a power grabbing bunch of assholes. So yes, the group of assholes has assholes from everywhere. If the internet were turned over to a bunch of assholes then everyone would still have a say, but would not be listened to.

    Also, your excuses for seizure of the internet are incredibly weak. All this proves is that the ITU can arbitrarily and preemptively censor the entire internet as they see fit. Whether they have evidence of piracy or political dissent will not matter, they will shut the sites down simply because they do not like them. This is unacceptable and reason alone to leave the internet be.

     

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

  13.  
    icon
    Wally (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 4:41am

    ????

    Who does China think they are trying to wrestle away US control of the Internet???? Don't they know we invented it??

    Well now that we know the quite impossible goal of the ITU is. Especially when you consider the US handles about 3/4 of the Internet traffic around the world and has far more nodes than any other nation.

     

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

  14.  
    icon
    Vidiot (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 5:12am

    Re:

    Good Lord! No on/off switch? No cops on patrol? Why, those rotten terrorists would have a field day... doing their terrorist-like things wherever and whenever they want, right out in public!

    It's a good thing that those nice people at the ITU explained it for me -- how I'd have nothing to fear if they were in charge. What a load off my mind!

     

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

  15.  
    icon
    silverscarcat (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 5:14am

    Re: Re:

    With hookers! And blackjack! In fact, skip the blackjack!

    Eh, just forget the whole thing.

    - Bender, Futurama

     

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

  16.  
    identicon
    Last Freeman, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 5:17am

    ITU supports slavery

    The ITU closed door talks are scheduled to occur at Dubai, which is a constituent of the United Arab Emirates.

    United Arab Emirates law:
    "Confiscation of passports, although illegal, occurs on a large scale, primarily from unskilled or semi-skilled employees.

    The UAE's system of employment for non-citizens ties an employee to the employer and prevents him or her from seeking alternative employment without the express approval of the original employer. Also, among employers of foreign laborers non-payment of wages, cramped and unsanitary living conditions and poor health and safety practices are widespread and have been the subject of foreign media attention."

    Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates

    I couldn't think of a better place for the ITU to discuss the enslavement of the internet and her people. Bravo ITU for selecting Dubai as your location of choice to kill the free internet. Bravo...

     

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

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 5:33am

    Re:

    It is called Fidonet, and while shrinking and it still exists.

     

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

  18.  
    identicon
    theres a word for that, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 5:34am

    an internet that is under control of a bunch of nations many of them despots? theres a word for that: broken.


    the US is no angel by any means. but to hand over the net to guys that send there people to re education camps for going to protest? if your really that desperate when it comes to not liking how the US does things you need a break from politics.

    and this is coming from a guy who regularly says obscene things about the US government.

     

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

  19.  
    icon
    art guerrilla (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 6:22am

    will no one think of...

    ...the motherfuckin' eagles ? ? ?
    somewhere, a baby eaglet is crying...

     

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

  20.  
    identicon
    Aardvark, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 6:28am

    If They Grab It

    If the ITU grabs the Internet then I would not really have a problem with the United States pulling the plug and running the Internet domestically. Frankly, we have a majority of the useful sites anyhow and let the other countries come begging to us to be reconnected.

     

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

  21.  
    identicon
    anon, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 6:35am

    Anonymity

    We all really need a charter of rights for internet citizens and internet businesses. This has to be created and designed by the people in a public manner. Yes many will be unhappy with this but it needs to be done with the only goal in mind the protection of the people from governments that abuse there power to monitor and control the internet.

     

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

  22.  
    identicon
    DUMBASS POLITICIANS, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 6:38am

    itdoesntmatter.com

    all sides are evil trying to control us and are in affect bad for the real users....the usa of late is worse with all these laws for copyright , its patents and trolls for both....

    So who the fuck cares any more its all gone to shit...
    There is no democracy there is only slavery.

     

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

  23.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 6:47am

    Re:

    How about they build their own fucking internet.

     

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

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 7:00am

    Re:

    What a terrible comment.

    Your complete disregard for who is asking for the transfer and why doesn't meant it doesn't matter or that pointing it out is 'fear mongering.'

    Also your excuse for transferring to the ITU is incredibly weak. There's no evidence what-so-ever that a transfer to the ITU would result in less restrictive domain seizures while circumstantial evidence that a transfer to the ITU would result in more restrictions abounds.

     

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

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 7:01am

    Re: Re:

    Nor does it mean that a transfer to the ITU would improve matters.

     

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

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 7:20am

    Re: If They Grab It

    Agreed. It was just fine before they got on board. It'll be just fine if they go make their own internets.

     

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

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 7:29am

    I only Trust Liberty.
    Not the UN not the UTI (ITU) they would be a pain in my dong.

     

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

  28.  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 7:42am

    Re:

    Nah, it'll just be like the SOPA/PIPA thing, where they'll say that 'multiple countries support our efforts', and just 'forget' to name the countries who's mention would undermine their efforts.

     

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

  29.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 7:51am

    China does have an ounce of a point here that US has been trying to gain control over the Internet bit by bit.

    BUT..if CHINA of all countries is all for the changes that they want to implement at ITU this year, that should seriously scare everyone's pants off. Nothing China ever is for in regards to Internet is a good thing. So I know which side I'm on this time.

     

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

  30.  
    identicon
    Gee, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 8:08am

    "The article goes on to cite the US apparently turning off the .iq domain for Iraq during the invasion in 2003."

    "..it was entirely managed and controlled by a guy in Texas who was accused of funding terrorists.."

    "..it was a criminal investigation into separate issues.."

    Umm, the war in 2003 was because of TERRORISTS. I wouldn't really call that a separate issue.

     

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

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 8:44am

    I say the US should just sell the "internet" to the U.N. for relief of all foreign debts. US still has a powerful seat in the U.N. and all Nations have a say on how it will be managed.

     

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

  32.  
    icon
    Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 10:23am

    Re: Re:

    Like they say, 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it!'.
    I dunno, it doesn't exactly look entirely unbroken from here and the argument about not trusting the US with it has some weight, witness the amount of bullying of both ICANN and other countries by the US to remove stuff it doesn't like that may be completely legal in the hosting country.
    On the other hand amputation with a chainsaw is almost never a terribly good solution to a broken leg, no matter how much it hurts.

     

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

  33.  
    icon
    Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 10:26am

    Re:

    I don't trust China, the US, the ITU, the wider UN, the UK [snip]
    Wouldn't it have been easier to say "I don't trust governments and especially beaurocrats"? :p

     

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

  34.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 10:52am

    I'm convinced that the great China firewall will eventually become the great global firewall because the people on their side have all the power and the people on our side are more than eager to beat the anti-America drum without thinking of the consequences beforehand.

     

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

  35.  
    icon
    Alana (profile), Nov 27th, 2012 @ 8:07pm

    Re:

    I don't trust [insert government here].

     

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

  36.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 27th, 2012 @ 9:45pm

    In God we trust everyone else we question.

     

    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