Skip to main content

House resolution urges U.S. to stand firm against U.N. Internet power grab

House resolution urges Obama to stand firm against U.N. Internet power grab
Image used with permission by copyright holder

The fight against forthcoming attempts by international governments to seize greater control over the global Internet continued this morning with the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s passage of a resolution that pushes Obama administration to remain firmly opposed to such attempts.

Introduced by U.S. Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-CA), H. Con. Res 127, which passed with strong bi-partisan support, comes in response to reported efforts from countries including Russia and China to give greater regulatory powers over the Web to the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), a wing of the United Nations that oversees global communications, like long-distance telephone service, but does not currently have any jurisdiction over the Internet. Proposals to grant more power to the ITU are expected to come up for discussion, and possibly a vote, by the ITU’s 193 member states at the World Conference on Telecommunications (WCIT), which will take place in Dubai this December.

Recommended Videos

H. Con. Res. 127 now has 58 co-sponsors, and will soon head for a vote before the full House. Read the full text of the resolution here (pdf).

What’s at stake

If adopted, these proposals would allegedly give the ITU broad powers to govern cybersecurity, the Internet address system, Web standards, and data privacy. They would also give individual governments the ability to more tightly control how the Internet operates in their respective countries. Individual government would also gain the ability to tax Internet content providers, like Google, Apple, and others, for their use of bandwidth in their country.

Currently, Internet governance operates under a decentralized, “multi-stakeholder” system, with a variety of nonprofit organizations — not governments — setting Web standards, controlling IP addresses, and performing other critical functions. That said, these organizations — the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), to name a few — often take cues from the U.S. government. Russia, China, Brazil, India, and other ITU member states want to wrest control from the U.S., arguing that the Internet is a global phenomenon, not an American one.

Not surprisingly, interested parties in the U.S. — from corporations to politicians on both sides of the aisle — are all firmly against changing the status quo. And for good reason.

“Despite denials, the Russians and Chinese are working quietly behind the scenes – and have been for years – to exert control over Web content and infrastructure,” said Bono Mack in a statement after the House committee vote. “This could lead to human rights abuses in the future and effectively putting a spigot on the free flow of information. We can’t let that happen.”

In prepared remarks made prior to the vote, Bono Mack said, “In many ways, we’re facing a referendum on the future of the Internet. A vote for my resolution is a vote to keep the Internet free from government control and to prevent Russia, China, and other nations from succeeding in giving the U.N. unprecedented power over Web content and infrastructure. That’s the quickest way for the Internet to one day become a wasteland of unfilled hopes, dreams, and opportunities.”

Don’t believe the hype

Contrary to all these warnings, the ITU claims that everyone has the situation all wrong. “I’d be surprised if you could find anything that would support these sorts of allegations,” said ITU spokesperson Sarah Parkes in a recent interview with Talking Points Memo. “Internet governance is not an issue at this conference. Some of it will concern things like exchange, routing and roaming rates,” she added, saying that such proposals would have to be approved by nearly all of the ITU’s member states to go into effect.

Parker further added that the best way to clear up the misconceptions is for those involved to have more open communications. The problem is, the entire WCIT (pronounced “wick-it”) process is secret. The tight-lipped operation has even spawned the creation of WCITLeaks.org, a site where anonymous tipsters can post documents related to the upcoming negotiations. Of the documents already posted, it is clear that ITU member states are, in fact, pushing for the ITU to gain greater control of the Internet. Parker called WCITLeaks “very amusing.”

Last word

Even if the proposals are as bad as those in Congress believe, the U.S. could still refuse to abide by the amended ITU treaty. Unfortunately, that wouldn’t make much of a difference, since other countries would recognize it, and the same problem of greater government control of the Internet would still exist.

Furthermore, it IS wrong to think of this as a U.S. vs. the world battle. As Eli Dourado, a technology policy research fellow at Mercatus Center at George Mason University, and a co-creator of WCITLeaks explains in a blog post on Tech Liberation: “This is an Internet users vs. their governments issue. Who benefits from increased ITU oversight of the Internet? Certainly not ordinary users in foreign countries, who would then be censored and spied upon by their governments with full international approval. The winners would be autocratic regimes, not their subjects.”

Dourado goes on to point out that the U.S. should not just walk away from the WCIT negotiations in order to maintain its current control of the Web. Instead, “the U.S. should walk away from WCIT as part of a repentant rejection of Internet policy under Bush and Obama, which has consistently carved out a greater role for the government online.” And that is the real point of all this — keeping the overreaching, grubby mitts of government off our Web.

Andrew Couts
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Features Editor for Digital Trends, Andrew Couts covers a wide swath of consumer technology topics, with particular focus on…
How to change margins in Google Docs
Laptop Working from Home

When you create a document in Google Docs, you may need to adjust the space between the edge of the page and the content --- the margins. For instance, many professors have requirements for the margin sizes you must use for college papers.

You can easily change the left, right, top, and bottom margins in Google Docs and have a few different ways to do it.

Read more
What is Microsoft Teams? How to use the collaboration app
A close-up of someone using Microsoft Teams on a laptop for a videoconference.

Online team collaboration is the new norm as companies spread their workforce across the globe. Gone are the days of primarily relying on group emails, as teams can now work together in real time using an instant chat-style interface, no matter where they are.

Using Microsoft Teams affords video conferencing, real-time discussions, document sharing and editing, and more for companies and corporations. It's one of many collaboration tools designed to bring company workers together in an online space. It’s not designed for communicating with family and friends, but for colleagues and clients.

Read more
Microsoft Word vs. Google Docs
A person using a laptop that displays various Microsoft Office apps.

For the last few decades, Microsoft Word has been the de facto standard for word processors across the working world. That's finally starting to shift, and it looks like one of Google's productivity apps is the heir apparent. The company's Google Docs solution (or to be specific, the integrated word processor) is cross-platform and interoperable, automatically syncs, is easily shareable, and perhaps best of all, is free.

However, using Google Docs proves it still has a long way to go before it can match all of Word's features -- Microsoft has been developing its word processor for over 30 years, after all, and millions still use Microsoft Word. Will Google Docs' low barrier to entry and cross-platform functionality win out? Let's break down each word processor in terms of features and capabilities to help you determine which is best for your needs.
How does each word processing program compare?
To put it lightly, Microsoft Word has an incredible advantage over Google Docs in terms of raw technical capability. From relatively humble beginnings in the 1980s, Microsoft has added new tools and options in each successive version. Most of the essential editing tools are available in Google Docs, but users who are used to Word will find it limited.

Read more