UN to regulate the Internet ?

By Hum
in Back Page News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Hum

Posted
Posted

A U.N.-sponsored conference next month in Dubai will propose new regulations and restrictions for the Internet, which critics say will censor free speech, levy tariffs on e-commerce, and even force companies to clean up their ?e-waste? and make gadgets that are better for the environment.

Concerns about the closed-door event have sparked a Wikileaks-style info-leaking site, and led the State Department on Wednesday to file a series of new proposals or tranches seeking to ensure ?competition and commercial agreements -- and not regulation? as the meeting's main message.

Terry Kramer, the chief U.S. envoy to the conference, says the United States is against sanctions and believes management of the Internet by one central organization goes against free speech.

?[Doing nothing] would not be a terrible outcome at all,? Kramer said recently. ?We need to avoid suffocating the Internet space through well-meaning but overly prescriptive proposals that would seek to control content.?

The conference will be run by the International Telecommunications Union (ITC), a U.N. agency that has typically provided a welcome service by making sure that the Internet works across countries. Many of its guidelines were first instituted in 1988. Most haven?t changed since then.

The World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) is the first such meeting since those guidelines were created, and businesses are taking it seriously: U.S. delegates will include representatives from AT&T, Cisco, Facebook, GoDaddy, and dozens more.

To dispel concerns, the ITU played damage control in early October.

?There are no proposals submitted to create new international regulatory agencies, or mechanisms, and hence no proposals to put ITU in control of the Internet!? said Malcolm Johnson, ITU's telecommunication standardization bureau director, in a written statement.

more

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1116569-un-to-regulate-the-internet/
Share on other sites
Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted
Terry Kramer, the chief U.S. envoy to the conference, says the United States is against sanctions and believes management of the Internet by one central organization goes against free speech.

No, the issue here is not "free speech" but that the US wants to keep control of the internet. The treatment of Wikileaks and Julian Assange perfectly demonstrates the United States' contempt for free speech when it goes against their interests. The legislation talked about here would require companies to clean up their "e-waste" and make equipment that is better for the environment, as well as setting aside investment to develop the internet backbone. Companies shouldn't be allowed to pollute and create inefficient products simply because it's more profitable - there needs to be safeguards in place.

Sadly, it's not surprising to see Fox News spin it as an attempt by the UN to take-over the internet. We know the US supposedly hates regulation - except when it comes to women's reproductive rights and preventing gay people from getting married - but it's not up to the US to dictate internet policy. It needs to be controlled internationally.

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

Build their own system and controll it. Enough said ....

You say that as if the US developed the entire infrastructure of the internet. Further, doing so would limit the influence of US companies in Europe. So while your "the US rules the world, suck it!" approach might make you feel better it's not actually in the interests of the US for Europe / the rest of the world to build a separate 'internet'.

Grand Master

+LogicalApex MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

Nobody should be in charge of the internet, IMO. It should be free and available for everyone to enjoy..... :blink:....I really have to lay off on the GNU/Linux.... :p

In principal, yes, in practice there has to be someone there to enforce the rules of fairness. We don't need laws and police to protect us from law abiding citizens, but instead to protect us from those who have no respect for the rules of society.

I'm really unsure how we should govern the body to protect the interests of society when it comes to the Internet. Pulling it up to the UN would help to tame the disproportionate control the US levies onto the Internet, but it would also enhance the interests of parties who want to cripple the web even more, such as China and Iran. I would support the control of it being in the hands of the people, but we don't have any precedents for international elections by the citizenry and I'm not sure the average person understands enough about it that they would care to make an informed decision.

Either way, we need a central governing body in the middle; the trick is how to ensure it protects our interests and not those of corporations or governments. Otherwise, we're trading one master, the US with one head, for another, the "International Community" with many heads.

  • Glassed Silver and theyarecomingforyou
  • Like 2
Grand Master

neufuse Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Ah lets just throw logic to the wind...

ah, comon, worked for GPS right?... right?... so when's the E.U.'s Galileo coming online full blown again? eh build your own always works out just great and fast when you do it for fear of someone else controlling it.... right?....

Grand Master

+LogicalApex MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

ah, comon, worked for GPS right?... right?... so when's the E.U.'s Galileo coming online full blown again? eh build your own always works out just great and fast when you do it for fear of someone else controlling it.... right?....

The success of the Internet has been largely due to the standardized nature of it. If you fragment those standards you'll end up harming both sides of the chasm, not helping. To suggest they build their own when doing so would be in the best interest of no one defies logic.

  • f0rk_b0mb and theyarecomingforyou
  • Like 2
Grand Master

f0rk_b0mb

Posted
Posted

In principal, yes, in practice there has to be someone there to enforce the rules of fairness. We don't need laws and police to protect us from law abiding citizens, but instead to protect us from those who have no respect for the rules of society.

I'm really unsure how we should govern the body to protect the interests of society when it comes to the Internet. Pulling it up to the UN would help to tame the disproportionate control the US levies onto the Internet, but it would also enhance the interests of parties who want to cripple the web even more, such as China and Iran. I would support the control of it being in the hands of the people, but we don't have any precidents for international elections by the citizenry and I'm not sure the average person understands enough about it that they would care to make an informed decision.

Either way, we need a central governing body in the middle the trick is how to do ensure it protects our interests and not those of corporations or governments. Otherwise, we're trading one master, the US with one head, for another, the "International Community" with many heads.

This is true. I have no problem with the UN taking down fake sites, sites with malicious intent, and sites that cause harm to children, etc and setting up standards. However, the whole PIPA/ACTA thing is a load. The UN should be very picket and choosey about what they take down and tell us exactly what it violated, or just give them time to take it down themselves.

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

While it would be sensible to put the UN in control of the internet - being an international organisation that can balance the needs of all countries - there needs to be safeguards in place to ensure that such power isn't abused. Net neutrality should be enshrined in law, which is something that the US isn't going to support. Even the UN seems unsure of what it intends to do and influential business organisations have made appeals to the UN to oppose net neutrality.

The issue should be how the UN should regulate the internet, not if it should.

  • Spartan Erik
  • Like 1
Grand Master

neufuse Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

The success of the Internet has been largely due to the standardized nature of it. If you fragment those standards you'll end up harming both sides of the chasm, not helping. To suggest they build their own when doing so would be in the best interest of no one defies logic.

that was kinda the point on my sarcasim...

Grand Master

HSoft

Posted
Posted

While it would be sensible to put the UN in control of the internet -

No it wouldn't. The UN is a useless organization full of corrupt politicians that never get anything done. Giving the UN control of anything is a bad idea.

You just like the idea because you hate America so much.

  • Lord Method Man
  • Like 1
Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted
The UN is a useless organization full of corrupt politicians that never get anything done. Giving the UN control of anything is a bad idea.

The diplomatic side of the UN is only one aspect of the organisation. Unfortunately it is the highest profile role of the UN and one which is paralysed by the use of vetoes by permanent members of the Security Council - particularly by the US, China and Russia. However, the UN does an incredible amount of very important work and UNESCO is a good example of that (unfortunately the US has dramatically undermined it since Palestine was admitted by a majority vote).

The reason that the US distrusts the UN - despite having huge influence over the organisation, including being home to the United Nations Headquarters - is that the US likes to consider itself above international law and it would rather dictate policy than work to form a consensus with other nations.

No it wouldn't. The UN is a useless organization full of corrupt politicians that never get anything done. Giving the UN control of anything is a bad idea.

Do you honestly believe that the UN is more corrupt than the US Congress? Because approval numbers would suggest the opposite.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • The Trump administration doesn't want you to use OpenAI's GPT-5.6 without its approval

      By TsarNikky · Posted

      Why would any self-respecting intelligent person follow any recommendation by Donald's GOP administration? With almost two years of fabrications, deceit, and blatantly illegal behavior, why believe them now? They had best be gone after the November 2026 election, so we'll wait and see.
    • AltSendme 0.4.1

      By Copernic · Posted

      AltSendme 0.4.1 by Razvan Serea AltSendme is a minimal, cross-platform application designed for fast, secure, and private peer-to-peer file transfers. It allows users to send files or entire directories directly between devices without relying on cloud servers, accounts, or any personal information. Everything is encrypted end-to-end using modern protocols like QUIC and TLS 1.3, ensuring both strong security and low-latency performance. Transfers are verified with BLAKE3 for data integrity, and interrupted downloads automatically resume, making the experience reliable even on unstable connections. You can transfer anything—images, videos, documents, and more. Integrity checks are performed on both ends, so your files are automatically verified for correctness during both sending and receiving. AltSendme works seamlessly across local networks or long-distance links, capable of saturating multi-gigabit connections for extremely fast delivery. With built-in NAT traversal and encrypted relay fallback, it connects devices almost anywhere. The app integrates with the Sendme CLI and will soon support mobile and web platforms. Fully free and open-source, AltSendme offers a lightweight, privacy-first alternative to traditional cloud-based services, removing size limits, upload costs, and unnecessary data exposure. AltSendme 0.4.1 changelog: Release Highlights Self-hosted relays: Run your own iroh relay so transfers don't rely on public infrastructure. Includes a full deployment template in deploy/relay/ with Docker Compose for a VPS and configuration examples for production use. Fly.io support: One-click deploy template for Fly.io, including a quick-start config (fly.dev.toml) for testing without a custom domain, plus production setup with Let's Encrypt and your own hostname. Relay settings UI: New Settings → Network panel to choose how AltSendme connects: automatic public relays, custom self-hosted URLs (with optional auth token), or disabled. Test connections, verify latency, and see live relay status in the footer. Disable relays: Turn off relay servers entirely when you only need same-network transfers (e.g. LAN). Direct connections only. No relay hop required when devices can reach each other. Android graduates from beta: Android is now part of the regular release cycle alongside desktop. APKs ship with each version (universal, arm64, and armv7). Other improvements Private relay access control via shared auth token Relay fallback notifications when a custom relay is unreachable Broadcast mode toggle in sharing settings Android release build fixes (split-per-ABI APKs, universal APK preservation) UI polish: mobile safe-area insets, dropzone layout, transfer progress animation Bug fixes for minification-related serialization issues and system tray icon loading What's Changed feat(relay): add relay status functionality and settings UI (a120cdf) feat(relay): implement custom relay server configuration and verification (51276c7) feat(relay): add configuration for private relay access and enhance observability features (48fbabf) feat(relay): enhance relay URL validation, display connection status (d4fffa0) feat(relay): add RelayChangeGuard component and enhance relay-related translations (16ba514) feat(broadcast): add toggle setting for broadcast mode in sharing UI (ca6d977) fix(relay): correct QUIC discovery port, pin image, templatize fly.dev (52a2ba5) fix: More broken serialization due to minification (67491a9) fix(android): preserve true universal APK across per-ABI builds (e9f256f) fix(ui): conditional safe-area insets padding on mobile (1182f0e) refactor(transfer): CircularRing component animation fix (944572b) chore(android): drop x86 and x86_64 release APKs, keep universal+arm64+armv7 (34ada0b) Download: AltSendme 0.4.1 | ARM64 | ~9.0 MB (Open Source) Download: AltSendme for MacOS | Android Links: AltSendme Home Page | GitHub | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Why Delta Chat is the best decentralized messenger you have probably never tried

      By zikalify · Posted

      You are mostly right about the ephemeral nature of it. As I mention in the article, if you dont add a second device or take a backup of your account before uninstalling it, then yes you will lose access to your account. That said, in terms of actual user experience when you sync multiple devices your message history carries across and there's also a Saved Messages chat like there is on Telegram to send messages and attachments between your installs. But yh, what you point out are correct and its not trying to emulate Messenger or Telegram.
    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG

      By zikalify · Posted

      OK so SearXNG is a meta search engine that you can install locally or use via a public instance. It scrapes other search engines which you choose and then sorts the results. Not as complicated as multiple relays
    • The Trump administration doesn't want you to use OpenAI's GPT-5.6 without its approval

      By excalpius · Posted

      The only difference here is that you think you came up with these reasons. You didn't. These age old fearmongering lies (that were NEVER true) were funded by and the anger stoked by Putin through proxies like Farage (and later in the USA, Trump) and filtered down through the skinheads, Neonazis, etc. until it reached the uninformed, ignorant, and gullible -- never realizing they were being played for fools against their own best interests. Even now, despite all of the EVIDENCE proving that Brexit was a terrible mistake for ALL citizens of the UK and that its supporters were tricked by Putin's proxies into sabotaging their own nation, you're still here defending these well-known lies as if they were ever true. Not only are they not true. They NEVER were. So, when are you going to realize that you were lied to and actually get angry at the liars and charlatans who lied to you, instead of blaming the innocent people they lied to you about?

  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      492
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      224
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      150
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!