Strickling Sees Big Threats to Future Internet Freedom
NAIROBI -- NTIA Administrator Lawrence Strickling sent a strong warning at the Internet Governance Forum Tuesday: “The future of the Internet is at risk. The multi-stakeholder model is being challenged.” Strickling pointed to “more and more instances of restrictions on the free flow of information, disputes between standards bodies and even appeals from incumbent carriers for government intervention on the terms and conditions for exchanging Internet traffic."
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Another challenge for the multi-stakeholder model is proposals for new instruments and bodies for Internet governance at the U.N., Strickling said. India, Brazil and South Africa (IBSA) recently announced a proposal at the U.N. General Assembly for a new “appropriate” U.N. body “to coordinate and evolve coherent and integrated global public policies pertaining to the Internet.” Strickling said he already formally rejected the IBSA proposal that “urged that this new governmental organization should oversee all bodies responsible for technical and operational functions of the Internet."
A second proposal was presented by China, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan in a letter to the U.N. Secretary General. The four countries propose an international code of conduct for information security including the “establishment of a multilateral, transparent and democratic international Internet management system to ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning of the Internet."
Given such developments, Strickling asked that all nations step up in support of the free and open Internet and the multistakeholder process. “As some seek to seize control of the Internet for governments, we will have a choice to make -- we can choose to expand bureaucracies or we can choose to expand jobs, economic development, wealth and fundamental freedoms and rights for all.” Strickling said uneven development in African countries is an example of what is at stake. It is “no coincidence that where African countries have embraced the open and multistakeholder Internet, the percent of their taxes from revenues attributed to ICT have soared."
Asked whether he would extend his general criticism to the European Commission after several demands from the EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes for a bigger role of governments in ICANN, Strickling said governments must be part of the multistakeholder process and the NTIA had “come down strongly on ICANN to ensure that it is inviting governments."
Kroes suggested that “the next IANA contractor must be protected from conflicts of interest and must interact efficiently with the governmental advisory board.” Kroes had criticized decisions by the ICANN board, which hopes to further provide the IANA function under contract with the NTIA. Kroes said unresponsiveness to government requests showed the need for reform of ICANN, and several times hinted at a need for change with regard to the IANA contract that is the basis for U.S. oversight over the root zone. A planned open meeting between the EC and the NTIA to consult about the IANA contract in September was cancelled, the EC and Strickling confirmed. EC officials told us the meeting was cancelled by the U.S. Strickling said the NTIA had not seen a need for an additional meeting after two consultations.
Kroes underlined in Nairobi that there were “very constructive discussions with its international partners,” and she rejected any notion that the discussion about Internet governance principles was “an effort to regulate the Internet.”