Posted on 09/26/2016 6:25:40 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March
Too many people are confused.
Let's cut through the lies and make this as simple as 'ABC'.
Lie Number 1: "ICANN's just a 'phone book'."
No, ICANN is the chained up guard dog in the back yard. [More on that later.]
The closest thing to a phonebook is a Top Level Domain like .COM or .MIL. But calling them 'libraries' would be closer to the truth.
So who is the TLD's librarian?
That would be the 'Registrar' who manages the TLD's registry.
~ ~
Simple as ABC:
A ... ICANN .. the chained up watchdog.
B ... TLD ... Top Level Domain ...[such as .com or .mil]
C ... Registrar ... the TLD's librarian.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Lie Number 2: "ICANN can't do anything to your website."
That is a lie.
The pyramid of legal power is also as simple as ABC:
a. ICANN at the top.
b. The TLD's Registrar in the middle.
c. The web site's domain name at the bottom.
If anyone says 'there is no internet giveaway' just say this:
"ICANN regulates the TLDs with the 'Registry Code of Conduct'."
[I personally keep a copy of handy responses like this -- ready to paste at a moment's notice. Easy, done -- you're the debate's Wild Bill Hickock.]
~ ~ ~
Lie Number 3: "This will be easy to fix."
Here's the simple, quick response:
*Not if ICANN signs a foreign contract before January.*
The USA bestowed ICANN with oversight powers. That is US law.
And this has wa .... ay too much limited government!
Not enough fees and taxes on the internet.
And worst of all ...
... too much freedom of speech!
It's too American.
TYRANTS UNITE!
The globalists in our government promised foreign tyrants [and their drones] that we would 'share' internet oversight with them.
A group hug in the name of censorship.
To do that, Obama is running out the clock. He's refusing to renew the IANA functions contract.
Deadline -- this Friday.
If Obama does not renew the contract by then, his crusade against us, the 'bitter clingers', is complete.
Off ICANN roams like a glob-trotting free range chicken to peck about and negotiate with foreign powers as an international defector who fled from the 'evil' USA.
Result:
ICANN can choose its harem of foreign brides to wed the power of US law with 'hate speech' notions.
NAZIs would have been first in line while roasting their wiener schnitzels at the book burning fire. And by the way, Japan also controlled the media back when they ravaged China and Korea to the point that Tokyo Rose was as close as they got to 'freedom of speech'. Ironic that China now emulates WWII Japan in that regard.
But I digress.
If Hillary is sworn in she has the 'internet gatekeeper' she always wanted.
And if Trump is sworn in he will need to untangle foreign contracts.
Here are three ways he might 'fix' this:
[1] Bribe foreign powers.
[2] Compromise with a new treaty that appeases ICANN's tyrant-buddies.
[3] Re-legislate ICANN's legal authority.
Option [3] might trigger a full blown cyber-war [or worse], and Obama made us woefully ill-prepared. [*a*]
Conclusion
According to Rosenzweig there is no telling how this 'transformation' could be fixed. He called it 'a shot in the dark'. John Bolton's view is even gloomier. Bolton is staking his reputation on his certainty that the damage would be beyond repair. [*b*]
[*a*]
Option [3] might trigger a full blown cyber-war [or worse], and Obama made us woefully ill-prepared.
Here’s the link to learn more:
China’s Conquest of Internet, ICANN + Quantum Encryption
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3473008/posts
1. Americans are to prosperous and consume too many Internet resources; therefore, we at ICAAN shall cancel many domain names from America and deny them domain registration until further notice. Third world nations need domain name access too!
2. Americans are to prosperous and consume too many Internet resources; therefore, we at ICAAN cause all American Internet Service Providers to throttle American bandwidth to the average of third world nations of just 256kbps.
3. Americans are to prosperous and consume too many Internet resources; therefore, we at ICAAN shall tax all Internet domain name from America a fee of $500 per year per domain name.
Bet on it. It is coming.
[*b*]
Warnings by John Bolton and Rosenzweig
John Bolton on Obama’s Internet Handover: ‘Within Ten Years, the Internet as We Know It Will End’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3472489/posts
~ ~
I’ve made two vanity pieces based on Rosenzweig’s testimony:
ICANN, a Pack of Liars
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3469994/posts
ICANN Transition Even Endangers ‘.gov’ and ‘.mil’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3469586/posts
Also, Senator Grassley’s warning similar to Rosenzweig:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3469467/posts
Here is Rosenzweig’s full statement at the hearing:
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/09-14-16-rosenzweig-testimony.
[More about Rosenzweig coming up]
Fees and taxes — very likely.
Also ...
Swedish telecom chief to steer web body ICANN to independence [USA Internet control expires Sept 30]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3394704/posts
Europe is seeking ‘internet ostracism’ to regulate ALL domain names [aka web addresses] throughout the world, and Obama is on board.
I realize you and Palmer have been discussing ways to work around TLD/Registrar oversight for websites [if it comes to that]. But it would still be a mess trying to work around it. And China might act as ICANN’s enforcer via cyber-warfare.
“I realize you and Palmer have been discussing ways to work around TLD/Registrar oversight for websites “
Um, with apologies, no we haven’t.
However, the actual answer is that the US Internet network may become independent, and all nations may seek to do the same. This would splinter the Internet. Not a major or significant issue for the US on whole, but it would have serious degradation consequences for the rest of the world.
Once again, the rest of the world hating on the US becomes their demise. Liberals are the most hate-filled little idiots God has ever created.
Friday is the Deadline.
‘IANA functions contract’ expires on Saturday.
FRegards ....
‘However, the actual answer is that the US Internet network may become independent, and all nations may seek to do the same.’
That is a possibility.
But the US gave ICANN legal authority to regulate the TLDs.
The first step would be to re-legislate that authority. That won’t happen until January.
The second step is to navigate the international law minefield. ICANN will sign contracts with foreign powers and still boast the legal power to regulate ALL TLDs.
To re-legislate ICANN’s international power could trigger a cassis belli — a ‘reason to fight’ with honor.
If someone doesn’t know a bit or byte about the 1’s and 0’s flowing across networks, a simple rule should apply here: If Obama is for it, it’s probably destructive to America.
Trump could change it with an executive order. This whole situation isn’t a treaty, so he has authority to change it at will. In fact, no ISP has to actually follow it anyway. They are free to create a new network.
Paul Rosenzweig
His articles in Heritage have been published all the way back to 1977. He’s one of those wicked-smart kind of guys who Wikipedia frequently mentions ,and yet the last time I looked there was no Wikipedia page that covered his bio. [Do they fear his intellectual firepower that much?]
He’s been deep in Homeland Security and Cyber-Security for a long time.
Relevant to this hearing, he authored and produced:
Cyber Warfare: How Conflicts in Cyberspace are Challenging America and Changing the World.
Two video lecture series from The Great Courses, Thinking About Cybersecurity: From Cyber Crime to Cyber Warfare and The Surveillance State: Big Data, Freedom, and You.
He is also a co-editor of two other relevant books:
1. Whistleblowers, Leaks and the Media: The First Amendment and National Security.
2. National Security Law in the News: A Guide for Journalists, Scholars, and Policymakers.
[Coming up ... some of his testimony]
Good point!
Trump opposes it.
Senators Sessions, Grassley, Mike Lee, Lankford, and Cruz opppose it. [Along with many others.]
Congressman Louis Gohmert and several other House members oppose it.
I hear that Speaker Ryan opposes it too. How serious he is about it might depend on voter feedback. [See tagline]
‘This whole situation isn’t a treaty, so he has authority to change it at will.’
The UN still has time as do others.
And frankly, no one knows all of the specifics of all of our treaties.
John Bolton is deeply concerned about this.
Your post is NBA. Nothing but acronyms. Worthless.
A summary of Rosenzweig’s testimony:
ICANN Transition Even Endangers ‘.gov’ and ‘.mil’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3469586/posts
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/09-14-16-rosenzweig-testimony.
ICANN transition insider Paul Rosenweig warns:
1. Foreign powers will “indisputably have increased influence”.
2. Transition a “leap in the dark”.
3. ICANN planning to move overseas.
4. ‘.gov’ and ‘.mil’ “not assured by any enforeable mechanism”.
[specifics later today]
Is ICANN just a ‘phone book’ like many experts say?
“Um, with apologies, no we haven’t [discussed ways to work around TLD/Registrar oversight].”
Palmer was discussing that with me. I assumed he was with you too. Sorry if your focus was elsewhere.
Here is some substance. More is coming up ...
Paul Rosenweig’s testimony
[ICANN Might Go Overseas]
ICANN is a non-profit corporation incorporated in California. Some say that this is a check on ICANN’s activities, since it would be subject to suit in America’s impartial, professional court system. Indeed, in July, Assistant Secretary Strickling confidently declared “ICANN is a California corporation and will remain so,” noting that a three-quarters vote of the Board would be required to change this requirement of ICANN’s Article of Incorporation, or to amend the “fundamental” bylaw requiring ICANN to maintain its primary place of business in California.6
I wish I were as confident as Assistant Secretary Strickling... The idea that ICANN would pack up and move has been contemplated by ICANN’s leadership.
Back in June 2014, ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade announced, in testimony to the French Senate, that the Board had authorized him to begin, as one of five major initiatives, the creation of a “parallel legal, international structure (maybe in Switzerland) for ICANN.”8 [snip]
... These changes were recommended even though some Members of Congress have explicitly opposed this outcome. Specifically, a 2014 letter from Senators John Thune (R–SD) and Marco Rubio (R–FL) made clear that from their perspective, government influence should not be expanded in the transition: First, ICANN must prevent governments from exercising undue influence over Internet governance. In April we led 33 Senators in a letter to NTIA regarding the IANA transition. We wrote that “[r]eplacing NTIA’s role with another governmental organization would be disastrous and we would vigorously oppose such a plan. [snip]
[more coming up in posts to ‘all’]
• The IANA transition is a leap in the dark. Nobody can reasonably tell you that there is certainty about how it will work out. Yet the safe and secure functioning of the network is vital to economic and political freedom around the globe. It would be prudent to develop experiencewith the new governance model during a trial period before the transition is made irrevocable.
• ICANN is incorporated in California. Yet some around the globe question that decision and are working, as part of follow on work, to see ICANN moved to another jurisdiction. Assuredly, the American role in overseeing ICANN’s operations should not be terminated until that issue is resolved.
• The US government is delegated as the operator of the .Gov and .Mil top level domains. Rather than guaranteeing the permanent continuation of that role by way of contract, the NTIA and ICANN have chosen to exchange letters which, in the end, promise the US that ICANN will follow its policy and notify the government before any re-delegation is made.
Thus, American control of .Gov and .Mil (which are essential to the continued stable operations ofAmerican government IT systems) is not assured by any enforceable mechanism.
[EMPHASIS: .gov and .mil “NOT ASSURED BY ANY ENFORCEABLE MECHANISM.”]
• In the new ICANN, other governments will indisputably have increased influence over the corporation. [snip]
• And, finally, there is reason to think that the newly Empowered Community will not be well-situated to exercise realistic oversight of ICANN and its staff. There are too many barriers to effective exercise of the EC’s new powers and too many practical and cultural reasons why the EC will not serve as an effective check on ICANN.
Without that check, ICANN risks becoming an unregulated monopoly with no effective outside oversight and control. [snip]
[EMPHASIS: ‘ICANN risks becoming an unregulated monopoly’]
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.