ITU Internet talks in jeopardy

Legalbrief reports that the conference of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), which ends in Dubai on Friday, is supposed to result in the adoption of a new international treaty governing trans-border communications. A report on the newsfactor.com site notes that the Russian plan had been backed by China, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates, while the US, Canada and Europe, among other countries, have opposed additional governmental controls. The Washington Post reports that the US and its backers have used the event to argue that sanctioning greater government roles in Internet oversight could allow states that already heavily censor Web traffic, such as China or Iran, to justify more restrictions and monitoring. A high-powered US delegation - including representatives from tech giants such as Google and Microsoft - has tried to block all discussions of possible Internet regulations. The effort, however, has met strong headwinds from countries such as Russia that want a greater control over Net commerce and security.

So far, the closed-door talks have failed to find much common ground at the 193-nation UN ITU, which last updated its rules in 1988 before the Internet became a global force. 'What's happened in the conference is a variety of proposals have come in from other nations that get into the internet, that look at internet governance,' the head of the 123-member US delegation, Ambassador Terry Kramer, is quoted in the report as saying. 'It creates an open door for review of content and potential censorship there. It will create a chilling environment for the internet.' A report on the News24 site notes that divisions first surfaced on Friday at a critical session at the midpoint of the conference when delegates refused to adopt a US-Canadian proposal to limit the treaty's scope to traditional communications carriers and exclude Internet companies such as Google, the ITU said on its website. Further complicating the negotiations was what a US official at the talks called the 'surprise' announcement of an accord among some Arab states, Russia and other countries to pursue treaty amendments that are expected to include Internet provisions unacceptable to the US. Full report on the newsfactor.com site Full report in The Washington Post Full report on the News24 site

White House officials warned yesterday (Tuesday) that the US would not support a UN treaty that gives governments more control over the Internet. Administration officials argued that the Dubai conference should be about updating a public telecommunications treaty to reflect today's market-based realities and not a new venue to create regulations on the Internet, private networks, or the data flowing across them. A report on thehill.com site notes that White House officials made clear that the US would not support the treaty if it disrupts the governance structure of the Internet. Full report on thehill.com site

Forbes says that if the summit ends with the ITU endorsing some of the most worrisome proposals, it could mark the beginning of the end of the era of Internet freedom. Among the versions of the treaty on the table are proposals that would turn the Internet into a hyper-efficient surveillance machine, create an Internet toll system and open the door to poorly thought-out regulation. 'These proposals would break what's working - freedom of information and freedom of access. And they wouldn't help fix the parts of the Internet that need reinforcing, namely security and privacy. Meanwhile, it's important to acknowledge that the current approach to Internet governance needs fine tuning. There should be more opportunities for international policy making as the United States relinquishes its historic role. The actions of ICANN, and other organisations, should be subject to tougher scrutiny. Just one example of why that's needed is ICANN's handling of the release of new generic top-level domains, which seems to have been successful mainly at triggering trademark infringement claims. Nevertheless, there are better solutions than turning Internet governance over to the UN's bureaucracy. There are other ways of creating a more level playing field. Government representatives, who now sit on advisory committees, could be given a greater say. A lot more could be done to increase cross border collaboration around security, in particular. The era of Internet freedom doesn't have to come to an end. And assuming prudence can win out over politics, it won't.' Full Forbes column