View Full Version : Internet censorship on its way?

26th March 2004, 11:59 PM
This blows my mind that the UN could ask for something that has the potential to be so destructive. Read the whole story here.


I find it really hard to believe that the UN wants to give more power to countries that already censor the internet and let them kind of determine the direction in which it goes. Unbelieveable. It seems to me the cat is out of the bag so to speak, but who knows. It boggles my mind. How being my biggest question.

27th March 2004, 02:58 AM
I wouldn't worry too much about it. The U.N. is pretty much a tooothless tiger.

27th March 2004, 04:12 PM
It wouldbe very difficult to censor the internet anyway.

27th March 2004, 04:15 PM
This is true, but the fact that someone though enought about it to want to is scary

27th March 2004, 05:37 PM
I find VeriSign's sitefinder service that stole all non registered domains far more offensive, even if it is not exactly about censorship. ICANN even demanded it be taken down (http://www.icann.org/announcements/advisory-03oct03.htm).

There are quite a few web sites (http://directory.google.com/Top/Society/Issues/Business/Allegedly_Unethical_Firms/Verisign/) about this fiasco.

This actually happened. The UN proposal has no specifics. Plus hopefully this "internationalized" Intenet will have the same freedoms the current one does, the UN being into human rights and all.

27th March 2004, 05:40 PM
The only thing that scares me is the possiblity of third world dictators getting more of a say. Their base of power could become huge if they get a say in internet censorship

29th March 2004, 01:08 AM
Most of the "third world dictators" you might be thinking of (I'm not sure which leaders you're thinking of) probably aren't members of the U.N., though, so it's not too much of a worry there.

Also, my reccomendation in that case would be "don't put your servers in their country, eh?" Since, after all, the U.N. has no direct authority over countries.

Of course, if they sign treaties and enough nations ratify the treaty for it to come into force, then it's binding on those nations in some way. Of course, treaties change a lot in that whole process of getting them approved, too.


29th March 2004, 01:11 AM
Oh, also, I just read the article. It sounds like the meeting wasn't about censorship, but about internationalizing and coming to some agreements about the sort of stuff that ICANN and the IETF do. :-) It was just one small group that sent around some paper that expressed a concern about censorship, not even one of the actual members of the committe suggesting anything in the direction.

29th March 2004, 02:24 AM
Its just the idea that i find appalling. Theres no way in hell third world leaders are ever going to have control over the net or be able to censor it, its just the idea thats ridiculus. The fact that someone even though of it is disturbing.

29th March 2004, 07:59 AM
Primarily it is an article about internationalizing fundamental Internet services, like managing domains and root DNS servers. Let's face it, the root servers (http://www.root-servers.org/) are primarily in the US.

Also, be aware the censorship idea came from a free speech activist organization (http://www.wpfc.org/index.jsp).

I don't see bruatal regime running a root server in the near future, fortunately. Of more concern is the great firewall of China (http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040326.wchin0326/BNStory/Front/) a massive censorship case that exists today.

30th March 2004, 08:07 PM
A quote form one of the related articles:

Dozens of delegates from developing nations echoed Annan's remarks throughout the rest of the day, arguing that their governments do not have a voice in the way the Internet is operated and that more money and investment from richer nations is the only way to end the so-called digital divide.
I think this is the real issue...they want someone else to pay for it.
I bet there are more than just the developing nations that want this...more specifically free access to the internet without control...
censorship is part of it, but the spread of propaganda is another...
cybercrime, identity theft...etc...etc...

Most delegates used Thursday's summit to dress up their arguments in high-minded rhetoric about democracy and equality, but one recurring theme was a bit more practical: money.