| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
FBI Shows UN How Internet Governance is Really Done
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 4 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Wrong.
This IS global internet governance because it involves the use of international treaties among governments in a way that affects the basic operations of Internet connectivity. If taking down an entire string of websites because of the content published is not internet governance, what is? (the content may or may not have been illegal, that is not the point)
"Routine police investigation?" Not at all. It's extraterritorial, for one thing; routine police investigations involve authorities acting within their own jurisdiction. What's even less "routine" about this case is the indirect ussage of the MLT: the FBI had no interest in the case at all; the Swiss and Italian law enforcement authorities were using a USA-UK agreement to gain access to the servers of a US company with operations in England. Globalized law.
If ISPs get a lot of these kind of cases it underscores my main point: so many people in the US hear about the UN and WSIS getting involved in "Internet governance" and they start to scream "omigod, governments are intefering with the [otherwise free] internet!" And this is kinda dumb and borderline hypocritical, isn't it? When US government agencies can cooperate to suppress expression on the Internet and impose gag orders on everyone involved based on (nontransparent) requests by law enforcement authorities in other countries, it is obvious that we already have substantial means of government intervention that can be and is being used to suppress certain kinds of content on the Internet.
The real issue is, when did the public get any kind of input into that system of governance? Whose interests does it serve? Is it being abused?
In our discussions of Internet governance and threats from government to the free operation of the Internet, let's stop being distracted by scare talk about Chinese censorship - let's look at who's actions are REALLY haveing a global impact on the Internet - it's the good old USA.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
You need to rethink "internet governance"
by Mueller
|
|
|
|
|
>1. What you define as expressions, other people
>would define as crimes. May I remind you that
>it is illegal in the US also to reveal the
>identity of say CIA agents.
Oh, you mean like what the Bush admin. did? Anyway, if a newspaper published images of CIA agents should they shut down the entire newspaper and all associated wire services for five days? Or should the people responsible be prosecuted?
>2. This is not about internet governance,
>because the servers in question didn't "govern"
>the internet in any way. They had no cntral
>position in hw the internet at large works.
>They were just ordinary web servers. Internet
>governance is about the root servers and tlds'
>name servers, ip-addresses, routing policies,
>etc. It's about how the internet at large is
>run, not about a couple of lowly webservers
>somewhere in the UK.
This is your, arbitrary definition of Internet governance. It is not the one in use by the people involved in the global debate over IG. You can get up to speed on that here:
http://www.internetgovernance.org. [internetgovernance.org]
>3. Most hacking incidents cross geographical
>borders. In order to have effective law
>enforcement, the police need to be able to
>investigate issues on foreign servers.
No disagreement here. The question is, who set the rules for these investigations? The point I am making is that these kinds of transnational law enforcement agreements constitute "Internet governance," despite the fact that most Americans are in denial that such a thing exists.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| | 1 reply beneath your current threshold. |
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
