-------- Forwarded Message --------
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Mark <
mark@tmtstrategies.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Subject: DL- Fwd: The Authoritarian Internet Power Grab - The Wall
Street Journal.
To: Dave <
dave@farber.net>
FYI . . .
----- Forwarded message from Bill Frezza <
Bill.Frezza@cei.org> -----
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:44:57 +0000
From: Bill Frezza <
Bill.Frezza@cei.org>
Subject: The Authoritarian Internet Power Grab - The Wall Street
Journal.
To: Mark Stahlman <
mark@tmtstrategies.com>
The Authoritarian Internet Power Grab
The Internet of Things will be worth trillions by 2025. China
wants centralized control.
The Wall Street Journal, Oct. 25, 2016
By Robert M. McDowell and Gordon M. Goldstein
The future of the internet could be at stake at a conference
beginning this week in Tunisia, where diplomats from more than 100
countries will debate United Nations jurisdiction over the web.
What emerges from the World Telecommunication Standardization
Assembly will affect geopolitics and global economic growth, and
possibly internet freedom for billions of users.
U.N. members will address cybercrime, privacy and the potential
regulation of internet companies, applications and content. Most
important, diplomats will discuss the emerging Internet of Things,
which will soon connect tens of billions of devices and people to
the global network.
A new navigational and addressing technology, Digital Object
Architecture (DOA), could enable the real-time surveillance and
tracking of each device and individual connected to the web. Some
governments are advocating that DOA be the singular and mandatory
addressing system for the Internet of Things. They also want this
system to be centrally controlled by the U.N.’s International
Telecommunication Union, which has contractual rights to the
underlying intellectual property.
At the meeting in Tunisia, China is working to join the leadership
of the global study group on DOA and the Internet of Things, which
the U.N. projects <
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/wtsa16/Documents/WTSA16Infographic.pdf>
will generate $6 trillion in global economic value by 2025.
Digital Object Architecture tracking tools could be integrated
into industries ranging from aviation to pharmaceuticals.Such a
system could also help governments mandate charges for any online
financial transaction, such as through bank ATMs, credit-card
payments, electronic money transfers or mobile banking. Such
transaction taxes could upend the pace of investment and
innovation in the internet space and distort global commerce.
The brewing conflict comes at a difficult moment. On Oct. 1, the
Obama administration relinquished its legal oversight of the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann), which
manages the Domain Name System. The fight over Icann’s future
ended a decadeslong bipartisan consensus on how to protect an open
internet. U.S. policy makers should put the Icann fight behind
them and work together to think strategically about the emerging
geopolitics of the internet and restore bothunity and resolve to
a fragmented American tech policy. At risk is the internet’s
technical architecture and regulatory structure, which scores of
nations seek to bring under foreign government and multilateral
control.
These latest developments are part of a broader shift in the
relationship between government and the internet. Countries like
Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia are all pursuing a grand strategy to
use international organizations, particularly the U.N., to control
the digital future. The Tunisia conference is the latest in a
series of efforts to expand the International Telecommunication
Union’s mandate beyond its historical function of
telecommunications coordination.
Today’s global fight over internet freedom started more than a
decade ago. In 2003, China, Russia and other countries initiated a
persistent and patient campaign to bring Icann under the control
of the United Nations. In 2012 the U.S. led a coalition of 55
countries that refused to sign a global treaty negotiated in Dubai
that would have expanded the U.N.’s reach and power to shape how
key aspects of the internet operate.
While the U.S. and some of its internet allies rejected the Dubai
power grab, 89 other countries voted for more U.N. influence,
including an enlarged role in “international Internet governance
and for ensuring the stability, security and continuity of the
existing Internet and its future development.” That particular
resolution<
http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/documents/final-acts-wcit-12.pdf>
was rammed through at 1:30 a.m. on the penultimate night of the
conference—forcing the U.S. delegation, of which we were both
members—to contest the conference’s legitimacy and boycott its
result.
In 2015 a coalition comprised of China and 134 other countries
submitted a manifesto to another U.N. meeting insisting that
national governments—rather than NGOs, civil society, consumers or
business innovators—should dictate the digital future. The bloc
declared that “overall authority for Internet-related public
policy issues is the sovereign right of States.”
In April Russia’s Vladimir Putin<
http://topics.wsj.com/person/P/Vladimir-Putin/6409>
and the leaders of China and India issued a joint communiqué
proclaiming “the need to internationalize Internet governance” and
enhance the role of the U.N. Momentum, energy and numbers are on
their side. As is bureaucratic power: A Chinese government
diplomat is today the secretary-general of the U.N.’s
International Telecommunication Union.
The first iteration of the privatized internet was conceived and
controlled by the nongovernmental global technical community,
civil society and the private economy, which unleashed the
greatest wave of innovation in world history. The internet of the
future, in contrast, may be shaped by foreign governments and the
U.N. if countries like Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and China
achieve their strategic objective.
America must quickly move beyond the divisive argument about Icann
and regain its internet-policy footing. Many more consequential
battles over internet freedom loom—conflicts that will shape the
digital future. It is time for the U.S. to unify again behind a
bipartisan vision and common strategy to safeguard internet
freedom for tomorrow.
Mr. McDowell, a former Republican commissioner of the Federal
Communications Commission, is a senior fellow at the Hudson
Institute. Mr. Goldstein, a Democrat, is an adjunct senior fellow
at the Council on Foreign Relations.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-authoritarian-internet-power-grab-1477436573
______________________________
_________________________
Bill Frezza
Fellow, The Competitive Enterprise Institute
Host, RealClear Radio Hour
Boston, MA 617-417-5916<tel:617-417-5916>
Bill@RealClearRadio.org<x-apple-msg-load://5BEC2178-B827-4858-B3BC-36C178B3674C/bill@RealClearRadio.org>
WXKS 1200 AM & WJMN 94.5 FM-HD2 Boston
KNEW 960 AM & KOSF 103.7 FM-HD2 San Francisco
Listen live on iHeartRadio<http://www.iheart.com/live/Bloomberg-1200-945FM-HD2-4705/>
or catch the podcasts on
www.RealClearRadio.org<http://www.realclearradio.org/>
----- End forwarded