Posted on 09/23/2016 10:35:37 AM PDT by Freedom56v2
A key player of the Obama administration’s internet giveaway was unable to offer a straight answer about how the organization that handles the system’s road map would be run, or whether or not it would be moved outside of the United States.
At a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing about the proposed internet giveaway at the end of the month, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas (A, 97%) confronted Goran Marby, president and CEO of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which is responsible for maintaining the internet’s address systems.
In a particularly tense exchange with Marby, the ICANN chief could not seem to find a straight answer on whether or not the organization — which currently operates as a nonprofit under California law — could see its bylaws altered by a multi-stakeholder body, or whether the organization could be moved to countries under oppressive regimes.
Under the structure of the proposed giveaway, ICANN would be no longer be tied to the United States government, which opponents of the move argue would remove free speech protections from the government’s overall administration.
During the exchange, in which Goran repeatedly dodged the chair’s questions, the nonprofit leader could not even answer the question regarding whether or not he agreed with Reporters Without Borders’ assertion that the People’s Republic of China is an “enemy of the internet” due to its repeated free speech violations.
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativereview.com ...
Cruz: So, just to clarify your testimony is the community – the U.S. businesses – who have had a questionable record of protecting free speech in the past have the authority to change the bylaws in the future. Is that correct.
Marby: As I stated earlier, if someone really wants to change this setting, it’s easier to start an alternative ICANN … outside the U.S.
Cruz: I’m not asking you which is easier. I’m asking if the bylaws can be changed.
Marby: There are so many checks and balances within the system, I would say that it’s hardly possible to do.
Cruz: Sir, this isn’t a complicated question. Can the bylaws be changed? You’re saying, ‘gosh, it would be easier to do something else.’ Either the bylaws can be changed, or they can’t.
Marby: I think I’ve answered this to the best of my ability. I cannot do it, the community can after all checks and balances, but the whole bylaws are built on California law.
Cruz: And under California law, the bylaws can be changed under what you referred to as the stakeholders community, is that correct?
Marby finally gave a stilted answer assuring that the bylaws could indeed be changed by the parties mentioned, but only after satisfying ICANN’s “checks and balances,” which also represent internet users and other stakeholders outside of large tech companies.
Earlier in the hearing, Sen. Cruz also voiced his concerns about the role that private corporations would play in the governance of the internet under the terms of the transition, given the reputation that many have earned for suppressing free speech on their own platforms.
“Under the guardianship of the United States and the First Amendment, the internet has truly become an oasis of freedom,” said Cruz in his opening statement, but warned that severing that role could lead to infringement of free speech due to powerful corporations and oppressive regimes.
“Imagine an internet run like one of our large, private universities today, with speech codes and safe zones — an Internet that determines some terms are too scary … microaggressions are too troubling … we will not allow them to be spoken on the Internet.
“Imagine an internet run like far too many European countries that punish so-called ‘hate speech’ — a notoriously malleable concept that has often been used to suppress views disfavored by those in power,” Cruz continued. “Or imagine an internet run like many Middle Eastern countries that punish what they deem to be blasphemy. Or imagine an internet run like China or Russia that punish and incarcerate those who engage in political dissent.”
Cruz referred to ICANN as a “corporation with a Byzantine governing structure designed to blur lines of accountability that is run by global bureaucrats who are supposedly accountable to the technocrats, to multinational corporations, to governments, including some of the most oppressive regimes in the world like China, Iran, and Russia.”
In his opening statement, Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa (D, 68%) also voiced concerns about the constitutionality of the proposed handoff, which rests on whether or not America’s “historic role” as steward of the internet also means that the information system counts as U.S. government property.
“We’ve continued to engage with the administration about this transition and to date the answers we’ve received have been inadequate,” reads a statement from Grassely. “It’s clear that the administration hasn’t conducted a thorough legal analysis of the many issues outstanding.”
Proponents of the handoff argue that the handoff is somewhere between a good thing and an irrelevant thing, like Techdirt’s Mike Masnick, who calls the government’s role in internet governance “flimsy” and near-nonexistent.
During the hearing, pro-giveaway testimonies attempted to cast the handoff in terms of decentralization and free markets, quoting reports from center-right organizations and urging those distrustful of the move to trust market forces and privatization in the matter.
“The best way to preserve Internet freedom is to depend on the community of stakeholders who own, operate, and transact business and exchange information over the myriad of networks that comprise the Internet,” said National Telecommunications and Information Administration Assistant Secretary Lawrence Strickling, who also said that the U.S. government’s current internet infrastructure framework “is too limited in scope” to effectively protect freedom of expression on the Web.
Sen. Cruz took issue with this sentiment, pointing to the fact that many of the tech companies who have come out in support of the giveaway have a spotty record on internet censorship themselves. In May, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and YouTube partnered with the European Union to promote a code of conduct that would crack down on what the international body considers “hate speech.”
“That’s not what I would call a fine record of free speech,” said Cruz, who accused proponents of “asking the American people to trust private companies with control of their free speech.”
More at the site
Ping and please feel free to add key words :)
Ping and please feel free to add key words :)
Nothing outside another Civil War will change these tyrannical moves by the evil Democrats. If Trump doesn’t win this election watch what they do.
Sen. Cruz is a brutal and forceful cross-examiner but the witness was stonewalling, as usual.
If Trump doesn’t win this election watch what they do.
And if Trump DOES win this election, watch what they do...
Over a false premise, they rioted in Ferguson, MO? Ferguson, MO! in Charlotte, NC?...Charlotte NC?!?! ETC.
I wonder what kind of transition of power we can expect :(
If Obama and the Dems can’t kill Free Speech then they’ll have the Chinese do it
At the same time ole hot-shot Ted is cross examining this individual, he is refusing to endorse the candidate that objects to the ICANN handover and all of the Obama/Clinton crimes.
So I’m left thinking Ted is one rather grossly conflicted individual.
Just seeing his name in print disgusts me.
Ted Cruz- Our savior..
Cruz begins his rehabilitation campaign, simultaneously storming the news cycle, already working the rope line with that silver tongue performance.
Texas is waiting.
LOL, that’s what I like about FR, we can agree and disagree; now get off your pedestal! :-)
I tweeted Drudge he should have countdown clock til Obama successfully steals Internet from Americans. So far, no sign though.
HEY!
“:^)
Okay. If Ted will.
Count ‘em. Who has Ted ever endorsed? Maybe 3 colleagues? Ted eshews endorsements.
Recall his service to McConnell, as penance for the “guvmint shutdown” fiasco. Cruz served as VC of the NSRC during the MISSISSIPPI TREATMENT to re-elect Thad over the arch TP conservative, who was leading that race.
Cruz gave the committee $200,000.00 during that effort and declined to endorse no one, including the conservative in MS.
Ted is about..., “Ted”.
I tweeted Drudge he should have countdown clock til Obama successfully steals Internet from Americans. So far, no sign though.
Problem is the Debate and Charlotte is sucking air out of the news cycle...May not be until Tues that National Media will focus on this...Hoping Hannity will address it with Trump.
Oops.. meant rather, “endorsed no one”.
Thanks RitaOK. I knew what you meant.
I’ll refrain from restating my obvious position on him.
Par for the course...
IfTrump does not win this upcoming election, with many Americans that ARE ARMED to the teeth, look for a possible revolt.
They FORGET that many, many Americans are ARMED TO THE TEETH.
The domain registry system is a license to print money. Why the hell are we giving it away instead of selling it for billions of dollars.
The company I work for spends more than $50k per year to maintain its many domain registrations. Granted, they are stupidly using an expensive registrar, but it's still a crapload of money. From just one company.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.