WCIT outcomes

December 14th, 2012 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Most countries at a conference on telecommunications oversight have agreed that a United Nations agency should play an “active” but not dominant role in as they struggled to reach a worldwide compromise.

As a marathon session at the UN’s World Conference on International Telecommunications concluded at about 1.30am local time in Dubai (10.30 am NZT), the chairman asked for a “feel of the room” and then noted that the nonbinding resolution had majority support, while denying it was a vote.

This may seem innocuous, but it will be used by many Governments to maintain their campaign to extend Government control of the global Internet.

I think has shown why the should have absolutely no role in Internet Governance. Its culture of secrecy and backroom deals is a cultural abyss from the way most Internet bodies work.

But ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Tour pleaded that the document was part of a balance that gave Western countries most of what they wanted in the more critical binding ITU treaty.

“If we were to eliminate this, that was a compromise that will come (back) on the table,” Tour warned the gathering ahead of the show of support. ITU officials are striving to forge consensus and avoid formal votes, and delegates were unsure after the proceeding whether the resolution had been adopted.

Compromise is good if both sides have valid points. But compromise is bad when what one side wants is, well, bad. This is what the totalitarian Governments do. They put up such outrageous proposals, so they will then get a compromise that moves them towards their goals. I say you do not compromise when it comes to Internet freedom.

Tags: , ,

5 Responses to “WCIT outcomes”

  1. peteremcc (341 comments) says:

    Is this like how Labour passed so many ridiculous laws in their final term, that would more usually be associated with the Green Party, that now that National are in power, they’ve compromised and we’re stuck with what you’d expect a Labour Party to do anyway?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Bob R (1,340 comments) says:

    ***United Nations agency should play an “active” but not dominant role in internet governance as they struggled to reach a worldwide compromise***

    Terrible idea. Might as well hand over control old USSR agency. Similar levels of totalitarianism and likelihood of interfering with free speech.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Ancient Dan (39 comments) says:

    With you 100 per cent on that one.
    The backbone trunk networks are hopefully not reliant on the tolitatrian members anyway.
    It may be that the freedom states seccede one day and leave these leeches on liberty to themsleves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Manolo (13,394 comments) says:

    Beware of any “active” state role over the internet. A euphemism for control and censure.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. UglyTruth (4,019 comments) says:

    “But compromise is bad when what one side wants is, well, bad. This is what the totalitarian Governments do. ”

    It’s what any democratic state does when it assumes authority over people. Faith in the system is no substitute for actual authority.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.