[bc-gnso] FW: The U.N. Threat to Internet Freedom

[Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

FYI--


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204792404577229074023195322.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion


  *   FEBRUARY 21, 2012
The U.N. Threat to Internet Freedom
Top-down, international regulation is antithetical to the Net, which has 
flourished under its current governance model.
By ROBERT M. 
MCDOWELL<http://online.wsj.com/search/term.html?KEYWORDS=ROBERT+M.+MCDOWELL&bylinesearch=true>
On Feb. 27, a diplomatic process will begin in Geneva that could result in a 
new treaty giving the United Nations unprecedented powers over the Internet. 
Dozens of countries, including Russia and China, are pushing hard to reach this 
goal by year's end. As Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said last June, 
his goal and that of his allies is to establish "international control over the 
Internet" through the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a 
treaty-based organization under U.N. auspices.
If successful, these new regulatory proposals would upend the Internet's 
flourishing regime, which has been in place since 1988. That year, delegates 
from 114 countries gathered in Australia to agree to a treaty that set the 
stage for dramatic liberalization of international telecommunications. This 
insulated the Internet from economic and technical regulation and quickly 
became the greatest deregulatory success story of all time.
Since the Net's inception, engineers, academics, user groups and others have 
convened in bottom-up nongovernmental organizations to keep it operating and 
thriving through what is known as a "multi-stakeholder" governance model. This 
consensus-driven private-sector approach has been the key to the Net's 
phenomenal success.
In 1995, shortly after it was privatized, only 16 million people used the 
Internet world-wide. By 2011, more than two billion were online-and that number 
is growing by as much as half a million every day. This explosive growth is the 
direct result of governments generally keeping their hands off the Internet 
sphere.
Net access, especially through mobile devices, is improving the human condition 
more quickly-and more fundamentally-than any other technology in history. 
Nowhere is this more true than in the developing world, where unfettered 
Internet technologies are expanding economies and raising living standards.
[Description: mcdowell]


Farmers who live far from markets are now able to find buyers for their crops 
through their Internet-connected mobile devices without assuming the risks and 
expenses of traveling with their goods. Worried parents are able to go online 
to locate medicine for their sick children. And proponents of political freedom 
are better able to share information and organize support to break down the 
walls of tyranny.
The Internet has also been a net job creator. A recent McKinsey study found 
that for every job disrupted by Internet connectivity, 2.6 new jobs are 
created. It is no coincidence that these wonderful developments blossomed as 
the Internet migrated further away from government control.
Today, however, Russia, China and their allies within the 193 member states of 
the ITU want to renegotiate the 1988 treaty to expand its reach into previously 
unregulated areas. Reading even a partial list of proposals that could be 
codified into international law next December at a conference in Dubai is 
chilling:
* Subject cyber security and data privacy to international control;
* Allow foreign phone companies to charge fees for "international" Internet 
traffic, perhaps even on a "per-click" basis for certain Web destinations, with 
the goal of generating revenue for state-owned phone companies and government 
treasuries;
* Impose unprecedented economic regulations such as mandates for rates, terms 
and conditions for currently unregulated traffic-swapping agreements known as 
"peering."
* Establish for the first time ITU dominion over important functions of 
multi-stakeholder Internet governance entities such as the Internet Corporation 
for Assigned Names and Numbers, the nonprofit entity that coordinates the .com 
and .org Web addresses of the world;
* Subsume under intergovernmental control many functions of the Internet 
Engineering Task Force, the Internet Society and other multi-stakeholder groups 
that establish the engineering and technical standards that allow the Internet 
to work;
* Regulate international mobile roaming rates and practices.
Many countries in the developing world, including India and Brazil, are 
particularly intrigued by these ideas. Even though Internet-based technologies 
are improving billions of lives everywhere, some governments feel excluded and 
want more control.
And let's face it, strong-arm regimes are threatened by popular outcries for 
political freedom that are empowered by unfettered Internet connectivity. They 
have formed impressive coalitions, and their efforts have progressed 
significantly.
Merely saying "no" to any changes to the current structure of Internet 
governance is likely to be a losing proposition. A more successful strategy 
would be for proponents of Internet freedom and prosperity within every nation 
to encourage a dialogue among all interested parties, including governments and 
the ITU, to broaden the multi-stakeholder umbrella with the goal of reaching 
consensus to address reasonable concerns. As part of this conversation, we 
should underscore the tremendous benefits that the Internet has yielded for the 
developing world through the multi-stakeholder model.
Upending this model with a new regulatory treaty is likely to partition the 
Internet as some countries would inevitably choose to opt out. A balkanized 
Internet would be devastating to global free trade and national sovereignty. It 
would impair Internet growth most severely in the developing world but also 
globally as technologists are forced to seek bureaucratic permission to 
innovate and invest. This would also undermine the proliferation of new 
cross-border technologies, such as cloud computing.
A top-down, centralized, international regulatory overlay is antithetical to 
the architecture of the Net, which is a global network of networks without 
borders. No government, let alone an intergovernmental body, can make 
engineering and economic decisions in lightning-fast Internet time. 
Productivity, rising living standards and the spread of freedom everywhere, but 
especially in the developing world, would grind to a halt as engineering and 
business decisions become politically paralyzed within a global regulatory body.
Any attempts to expand intergovernmental powers over the Internet-no matter how 
incremental or seemingly innocuous-should be turned back. Modernization and 
reform can be constructive, but not if the end result is a new global 
bureaucracy that departs from the multi-stakeholder model. Enlightened nations 
should draw a line in the sand against new regulations while welcoming reform 
that could include a nonregulatory role for the ITU.
Pro-regulation forces are, thus far, much more energized and organized than 
those who favor the multi-stakeholder approach. Regulation proponents only need 
to secure a simple majority of the 193 member states to codify their radical 
and counterproductive agenda. Unlike the U.N. Security Council, no country can 
wield a veto in ITU proceedings. With this in mind, some estimate that 
approximately 90 countries could be supporting intergovernmental Net 
regulation-a mere seven short of a majority.
While precious time ticks away, the U.S. has not named a leader for the treaty 
negotiation. We must awake from our slumber and engage before it is too late. 
Not only do these developments have the potential to affect the daily lives of 
all Americans, they also threaten freedom and prosperity across the globe.
Mr. McDowell is a commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission.
Copyright 2012 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved


Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey