Who Should control the Web?

[rspassey]

As titled
Lawmakers urge U.S. to keep control of Web (http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/10/20/congress.internet.reut/index.html).

Who do you think should control the web, if any, and why?
Should it be the US, UN, Zimbabwe... what designates that a country or global organization should have control over the web. Bickering around on who should be in charge certainly isn't making my internet browsing any safer. (just removed 12 spyware from 'rents computer) - Something, as we all can agree, should be done to make the internet safer (even average users who only read the news and stuff online are getting infested w/ cookies and possibly spyware - not how I want to browse), yet who would do the best job?

[blue60007]

Noo! No one entity should control the web.

[rspassey]

Agreed, I really don't think any one should be in control, perhaps some sort of AI ....

[Force Flow]

I would say no one organization. However, I think it *would* be a good idea to have a few separate organizations to take care of some of the various areas of the web to ensure standardization (web languages, internet protocols, etc). Some of that is around now, but they aren't really well-known by most people, nor strong or influential enough to invoke any sort of wide-spread upgrade or change.

[pc master]

No one counbtry should controll it. You let the UN controll it and we will plunge into world war 3.

[als814]

The whole fun part of the internet is that it cannot be controlled.

[kstatefan40]

It should be left as is. DNS systems work very well, and should be left like they have been. Saying the US controls the internet is quite an overstatement. We developed it, and in my opinion, it would be stealing for anyone to take it over from us without our permission.

[rspassey]

The US as a country didn't develop it. Developed by individual(s). The web does not belong to the US

[kstatefan40]

The US as a country didn't develop it. Developed by individual(s). The web does not belong to the US

It was developed by the United States Department of Defense in conjunction with several American Universities. I'd say that's enough to say that as a country, we developed it - because our tax dollars paid for its R&D.

[rspassey]

Yes - but does that mean that every piece of material that comes out of the US government is owned by the country. I think not; the country as a whole cannot view secret gov. documents - yet they were writen on paper that their tax money paid for, by a person whose salary comes from tax dollars.
Anyway this is off topic..... sorry

[kstatefan40]

It is owned by the government, which in our country means: it's owned by the people. I know this isn't always the case, but if you look at it that way, it is owned by our GOVERNMENT - which is a scary thought. I like the fact that it's controled by ICANN because it is unbiased.

Off topic, on your example, often times classified information is withheld at the will of the people. If such documents exsist, they exsist to protect national security, but we still own such documents.

[Alfred137]

No one, the internet is as free as the wind. And in any case if an entity should attempt to control the web it would also imply control it/"moderate" it. Thus violating our basic rights to freedom of speech and privacy. Argentina once tried to control emails, once they anounced it the government administration got immediate sue for attempting to break our privacy, abusing of their power, etc.

[mbossman2]

i have a question:

what would the positive result be if "control" of the internet would be moved from an internationally managed, american based, non-profit agency to the UN?

Is that move something that is change for just changes sake or will it have an overall positive affect?

Remember, moving "control" from the US to the UN would give countries who have a definite interest in (and history of) limiting access and content a much larger voice in the internet.

Forum click had quite a discussion about this a couple of weeks ago: http://www.forumclick.com/showthread.php?t=5750

[lil Jimmie]

Leave it as is.

[rspassey]

Leave it as is.

you don't mind that websites can put cookies on your system, and that the web is literally infested with 'evil' spyware and adware and malware and everything?

[lil Jimmie]

you don't mind that websites can put cookies on your system, and that the web is literally infested with 'evil' spyware and adware and malware and everything?


I don't accept cookies nor have I had spyware/adware/malware problems. The one and only virus ever I got was due to my wife and that was almost 5 years ago. Now if control was left in the hands of Iran or North Korea I don't know If I could even get on the internet.

[Litespeed]

Dali Lama

[mbossman2]

you don't mind that websites can put cookies on your system, and that the web is literally infested with 'evil' spyware and adware and malware and everything?

ICANN's role is not content based, it is the names, number scheme and DNS root servers that are under their "control".

Limiting available content (positive or negative in nature) is a dangerous game to play...one postive step (like outlawing malware) may be leveraged as precedent to take another, less positive step.

[rspassey]

I wouldn't mind seeing the internet 'moderated' by a group/ assebly of 4 regular citizens from each county in the world. Not diplomats who have too much hubris in their own countries.

[David M]

I have to disagree Ryan,

The Web is the free flow of information whether it is good information, bad information, malicious, criminal or incorrect information. Placing a filter on information is fine for parents to do to children because parents have the childs best interests at heart. But for adults to ask someone or some entity to place a filter on the information which comes to us, then we must ask if this entity which controls the filter ultimatly has our best interests at heart? Power ultimatly corrupts and it would be dangerous to ask any entity to control what information we are allowed view and what information is forbidden.

To place so much power in the the hands of so few is not a good idea.

In human history, only the tyrants tried to control the information..and all of them ultimately failed. Today's China is a perfect example. Chinas control of the Web is failing right now.

The Web is pretty much the Wild Wild West...and it should not be sanitized according to someone elses standards.

[blue60007]

As said before, there should definitely be organizations to make suggestions about standards and protocols, but no one should be forcing anyone. Also each country would be free to crack down on anything illegal going on in their country, but without hindering the flow of information on the Internet.