A public reply

[Michael Sondow <msondow@ic.sunysb.edu>]

	As a conscientious member of the worldwide community which,
while not deriving primary income from it, are the Internet's true
end-users and thus the most interested parties in changes to Internet
governance, I am very concerned by the lack of public representation on
the various discussion groups, councils, and boards presently deciding
the future structure of the Internet. I believe that I am far from being
alone in this concern.
	Throughout the information promulgated thus far by the NTIA, the
IANA, and the other Internet authorities on the subject of the creation
of a new central Internet authority, recurrent reference is made to the
"public good" as that central authority's purpose, yet nowhere, not in
the U.S. Government's white paper nor in the IANA's communications, is
mention made of representation by members of the public, much less of
any mechanism to assure that the decisions of the new authority -
certain to have widesweeping effects upon the public - will be made in
their interest and for their good.
	Until now, the Internet has been conducted in the public
interest because its founders and coordinators have been educators and
civil servants rather than representatives of industrial and other
concerns with a commercial stake in it. This authority is now being
transferred almost exclusively to commercial "stakeholders". What will
the effect be? Without doubt precisely the same that privatization in
other communications media has been, a transfer from the public good to
private gain, only on an even larger, more international scale. We have
seen this happen with radio, films, and especially television, when
control has been allowed to fall into the hands of entrepreneurs whose
sole interest is the sale of mediocrity, by definition the only thing
that can be sold and consumed massively. The Internet was founded on the
principle of diversity, like all that is best about America, and not on
privately-controlled mass communication and the conformity it brings,
which is the opposite of diversity. The diversity of the Internet is now
to be reversed, if something is not done to stop it.
	Privatization of the Domain Name System - which must lead
ultimately to commercialization of the domain name assignments that
permit full Internet integration at rates prohibitively expensive for
non-commercial public persons and entities - is incompatible with
control of the Internet by a not-for-profit organization for the public
good. In his Suggestions for a New Organizational Structure (07-12-98),
Dr. Jon Postel, head of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA),
expressed hope that each member of the new controlling Board "should
represent the interests of the Internet community as a whole. Once he or
she takes a Board seat, they should not be a representative of a
specific group, but rather a fiduciary for all those interested in and
affected by the operation of the Internet". That hope is forlorn. Board
members from corporations, commercial networks, Internet service
providers, and other commercial entities represent first and foremost
the entities that pay their salaries, and therefore cannot represent the
public. If they are the totality or even the majority of members of the
new Internet authority, it will be ruled by commercial interests and
will not function for the public good.
	Nevertheless, most countries using the Internet on a broad scale
abound in public interest groups. These include community lobbies,
consumer protection organizations, international, national, and local
educational, scientific, and public welfare institutions, libraries, and
public sector Internet groups such as user groups, student networks, and
senior citizens' networks. Has a place - a controlling place - been made
for their representatives on the new Internet councils and boards? If
this is not done, and quickly, the Internet will cease to exist in the
public interest.
	We still have a chance, perhaps our last, to reverse the
insidious process of privatization and commercialization of the
Internet. Let no one who, through indifference or fear, neglects to
speak out now and demand public control of the Internet complain on the
day, coming soon, when the great promise of the Internet will have been
betrayed and lost.