Appeared
in the Toronto Star on June 10, 2012 as UN Internet Takeover Rumours
Mask Bigger Governance Shortcomings
In recent months the Internet has been buzzing about the prospect of a
United Nations "takeover" of the Internet, including responsibility for
governance of the domain name system. The concern hit a fever pitch
late last month when the U.S. Congress held hearings on the issue. A
steady stream of technology companies and consumer groups expressed
fears with potential U.N. and foreign government involvement and
members of Congress pledged to take a strong stand against the takeover.
While a U.N. takeover would indeed be cause for serious concern, the
reality is far more complex and somewhat less ominous. This issue has
been festering for over 15 years and is less about whether there will
be efforts at governmental control and more about which government
controls.
The U.S. government established the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers (ICANN), a private, non-profit entity based in
California in 1998, granting it responsibility for Internet governance
leadership. ICANN was created with a vision of an open, transparent and
multi-stakeholder approach, where Internet users, companies, interest
groups, and governments could all participate in the development of
policies such as the creation and management of new domain name
extensions, the privacy rules associated with registration information,
and the development of dispute resolution policies for contested domain
names.
The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), a U.N. body, was
never happy with U.S. leadership and the ICANN model, embarking on
several efforts to assert greater influence over Internet governance
issues.
In 1996, it attempted to take control over the management of the domain
name system but failed to do so (leading to the creation of ICANN).
Several years later, it was the engine behind the World Summit on the
Information Society (WSIS), which raised the prospect of dramatic
change to the Internet governance model and a far more assertive role
for national governments. The ITU-backed WSIS initiative had
support from many countries around the world, but the U.S. and its
supporters (which included Canada) were able to keep the existing
system largely intact.
The latest concerns arise from the World Conference on International
Telecommunications, scheduled for Dubai later this year. The ITU is
rumoured to be ready to take another shot at Internet governance
control, a fear fueled by the notorious secrecy associated with the
conference documents (the actual proposals were leaked on the Internet
last week).
Given past history, there is little reason to believe the ITU will
succeed. Yet the issue is likely to recur for as long as the U.S.
treats the Internet as its own.
Successive administrations have regularly pressured ICANN on various
policy matters, including efforts to get it to drop plans to create a
dot-xxx domain (after years of global consultation and the development
of a neutral process for approval) and expressed serious reservations
with the introduction of hundreds of new domain name extensions. While
a multi-stakeholder approach means that governments have an opportunity
to express their views on policy issues, the U.S. seems to believe that
some views count more than others.
In fact, some of the same U.S. politicians who expressed outrage over
the ITU plans only months ago were supporters of the Stop Online Piracy
Act, the now-defeated controversial anti-piracy bill that included
provisions that meddled with the domain name system.
The current controversy misses the bigger point that Internet
governance still lacks a strong, universal commitment to a
multi-stakeholder approach that includes governments, business, and
civil society groups working together to develop policies that best
reflect the views of the global Internet community.
Developing such policies is frustratingly time consuming and difficult
– as any policy that implicates billions of people and the world’s most
important communication system would be. Yet an inclusive and
transparent system offers far more than the current unappealing
alternatives of either secretive U.N. involvement or U.S. assertion of
greater control whenever challenging policy issues arise.
Michael Geist holds the Canada
Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of
Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online
at www.michaelgeist.ca.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareWednesday June 13, 2012 |
|
The Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, which is
continuing its study
on intellectual property, received some important evidence last
week from an Ottawa firm focused on IP enforcement issues. Harry Page,
the CEO of UBM TechInsights,
told the committee that Bill C-11 will actually impede the ability to
enforce intellectual property rights. Page's concern is the same as
that expressed by businesses, consumer groups, education: overbroad
digital lock rules. According to Page:
we have a concern that aspects of the
Copyright Act may actually have an unintended consequence with respect
to our local technology community and our ability help people in the
protection of their intellectual property. Specifically, our concern is
that the anti-circumvention provisions could create legal uncertainty
where that would actually discourage the use of forensics to detect
infringement of other forms of intellectual property. Even though the
fact is that the circumvention of those protection measures actually
have nothing to do with the copyright material under protection.
While the committee legislation is
now passed and will soon be enacted we will continue our pledge to
continue to work with the government and the appropriate bodies to
ensure that the regulatory language bringing the act into force are
clear and precise so they do not hinder the full and forceful
protection of Canadian intellectual property and the protection of
intellectual property creators and owners in the international
marketplace.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday June 12, 2012 |
|
View
|
|
CRTC Commissioner Peter Menzies delivered a
speech
for Len Katz yesterday at the Banff World Media Festival, which
featured some notable comments about over-the-video services such as
Netflix:
OTT is an exciting new way to reach
out to people. Let's not think of it as a threat to Canadian content.
Let's think of it as an opportunity for Canadian content—an opportunity
to export and promote it around the world. Canadians have the talent
and creativity to produce programming that can connect with audiences
around the globe: our documentaries, our drama, our comedies, our
variety and children's programming. We have been relying on a
subsidized regime to support our own programming so that it can compete
with programming supported by a much larger audience base. This model
is becoming less and less relevant.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday June 12, 2012 |
|
|
