Posted on 10/01/2016 4:16:17 PM PDT by Freedom56v2
Washington (AFP) - The US government on Saturday ended its formal oversight role over the internet, handing over management of the online address system to a global non-profit entity.
The US Commerce Department announced that its contract had expired with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which manages the internet's so-called "root zone."
That leaves ICANN as a self-regulating organization that will be operated by the internet's "stakeholders" -- engineers, academics, businesses, non-government and government groups.
The move is part of a decades-old plan by the US to "privatize" the internet, and backers have said it would help maintain its integrity around the world.
US and ICANN officials have said the contract had given Washington a symbolic role as overseer or the internet's "root zone" where new online domains and addresses are created.
But critics, including some US lawmakers, argued that this was a "giveaway" by Washington that could allow authoritarian regimes to seize control.
A last-ditch effort by critics to block the plan -- a lawsuit filed by four US states -- failed when a Texas federal judge refused to issue an injunction to stop the transition.
Lawrence Strickling, who heads the Commerce Department unit which has managed these functions, issued a brief statement early Saturday confirming the transition of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).
"As of October 1, 2016, the IANA functions contract has expired," he said.
Stephen Crocker, ICANN's board chairman and one of the engineers who developed the early internet protocols, welcomed the end of the contract.
"This transition was envisioned 18 years ago, yet it was the tireless work of the global Internet community, which drafted the final proposal, that made this a reality," he said in a statement.
"This community validated the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. It has shown that a governance model defined by the inclusion of all voices, including business, academics, technical experts, civil society, governments and many others is the best way to assure that the Internet of tomorrow remains as free, open and accessible as the Internet of today."
The Internet Society, a group formed by internet founders aimed at keeping the system open, said the transition was a positive step.
"The IANA transition is a powerful illustration of the multi-stakeholder model and an affirmation of the principle that the best approach to address challenges is through bottom-up, transparent, and consensus-driven processes," the group said in a statement.
Washington where loads of politicians have said NOTHING about this issue.
That sounds good, but if you rely on satellites then there’s probably going to be a government involved anyway — at least for now.
Icann now controls the Internet. The USA controlled the Internet from its beginning in the early 1990’s to yesterday.
The UN( The evil cabal of authoritarian dictators and Islamics) controls Icann which controls the Internet now thanks to evil Obama giving it away to them.
anyone who thinks these villains, won’t try to censor the Internet is insane.
Just one way they could do it is to put pressure on search engines like Google to put websites that they don’t approve on black lists(remove them from search results so people can’t find these websites).
when will this start? who knows but as the years go on you will see less and less websites that don’t espouse what these villains believe, nothing about freedom, nothing good, nothing critical of Islam , nothing pro USA or conservatism etc.
A poster here arthur wildfire posted an Icann appliction .
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:arthurwildfiremarch/index?tab=comments;brevity=full;options=no-change
Anyone think If I try to start a website called Islam Is the Problems .com that Icann will approve it? If you do then post your justification here if you dare.
All of you that didn't help us stop this Obama giveaway and told is it was nothing , you own it and damn you all hell ,
Re: “It has shown that a governance model defined by the inclusion of all voices, including business, academics, technical experts, civil society, governments and many others is the best way to - assure that the Internet of tomorrow remains as free, open and accessible as the Internet of today.”
Ok, if what we had yesterday was “free, open and accessible” - why did they do this today? It has to be all about control. That’s the only answer that makes sense. I realize that’s also Captain Obvious, too.
The guy has the frequencies already but needs lots of money to get up and running. Hopefully this will take off as well as Obama gun sales.
For a look at the integrity of international bodies, look no further than the International Olympic Committee or FIFA. They are driven by bribery and intrigue.
FIFA & the IOC are farts in a hurricane compared to the trillions of dollars of commerce conducted with the assistance of the internet every year. Every business on the planet uses the internet in some way.
Right. LOL.
Yes.
And others more powerful than us tried to stop this transfer too:
Grateful that so many here care about this real issue.
For the few who foolishly dismiss the threat, please note high level military and security experts who protested to halt giveaway of Internet control:
“A coalition of 77 national security, cybersecurity and industry leaders wrote a letter to Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, just days ago asking for intervention.
“As individuals with extensive, first-hand experience with protecting our national security, we write to urge you to intervene in opposition to an imminent action that would, in our judgment, cause profound and irreversible damage to the United States’ vital interests,” the letter said.
“Indeed, there is, to our knowledge, no compelling reason for exposing the national security to such a risk by transferring our remaining control of the Internet in this way at this time. In light of the looming deadline, we feel compelled to urge you to impress upon President Obama that the contract between NTIA and ICANN cannot be safely terminated at this point.”
The signers included former Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank Gaffney Jr., former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin (Ret.), former Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, former Director of the Defense Nuclear Agency Vice Adm. Robert Monroe (Ret.) and former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew McCarthy, among others.
They warned: “In the absence of U.S. government involvement in IANA, it seems possible that, over time, foreign powers – including potentially or actually hostile ones – will be able to influence the IANA process. Even coercing the delay in approving IP addresses could impact military capabilities. From a broader view, given the well-documented ambition of these actors to restrict freedom of expression and/or entrepreneurial activity on the Internet, such a transfer of authority to ICANN could have far-reaching and undesirable consequences for untold numbers of people worldwide.”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-01/judge-denies-attempt-block-transfer-internet-oversight
Yes.
And others more powerful than us tried to stop this transfer too:
Grateful that so many here care about this real issue.
For the few who foolishly dismiss the threat, please note high level military and security experts who protested to halt giveaway of Internet control:
“A coalition of 77 national security, cybersecurity and industry leaders wrote a letter to Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, just days ago asking for intervention.
“As individuals with extensive, first-hand experience with protecting our national security, we write to urge you to intervene in opposition to an imminent action that would, in our judgment, cause profound and irreversible damage to the United States’ vital interests,” the letter said.
“Indeed, there is, to our knowledge, no compelling reason for exposing the national security to such a risk by transferring our remaining control of the Internet in this way at this time. In light of the looming deadline, we feel compelled to urge you to impress upon President Obama that the contract between NTIA and ICANN cannot be safely terminated at this point.”
The signers included former Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank Gaffney Jr., former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin (Ret.), former Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, former Director of the Defense Nuclear Agency Vice Adm. Robert Monroe (Ret.) and former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew McCarthy, among others.
They warned: “In the absence of U.S. government involvement in IANA, it seems possible that, over time, foreign powers – including potentially or actually hostile ones – will be able to influence the IANA process. Even coercing the delay in approving IP addresses could impact military capabilities. From a broader view, given the well-documented ambition of these actors to restrict freedom of expression and/or entrepreneurial activity on the Internet, such a transfer of authority to ICANN could have far-reaching and undesirable consequences for untold numbers of people worldwide.”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-01/judge-denies-attempt-block-transfer-internet-oversight
By whom. I would the new shepherds could be fought as now controlling a monopoly should an attempt be made to prohibit competition. But then they will probably just say it is a utility like organization.
We shall see how this all plays out.
By whom. I think would the new shepherds could be fought as now controlling a monopoly should an attempt be made to prohibit competition. But then they will probably just say it is a utility like organization.
We shall see how this all plays out.
That’s really scary and will be true in a few years if not sooner.
Our new internet overlords Icann and the UN are a pack of liars:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3469994/posts
Wednesdays’s senate hearing regarding the Internet Giveaway revealed that ICANN has been not merely dishonest but truth is alien to them. Senator Grassley found no solid reason to believe that our .gov and .mil websites will be left alone. [Which means no website is safe]. That lack of assurance concerns him.
According to Paul Rosenzweig [a cyber-war insider and former Homeland Administrator who wrote extensively about freedom-of-speech concerns] the only thing protecting the .mil and .gov websites is empty assurances in letters that have no legal value whatsoever.
To put it bluntly:
The senator and Rosenzweig both smell a rat.
All that told us this was nothing you own it. our days here are numbered enjoy them while you can.
. If I can build an INTRANET, then I can build an INTERNET. Right?
2. If the phone lines are a “public utility,” then does the UN regulate them now, too?
3. In an age of dramatic advances in wireless technology, who cares who controls the telephone lines?
From what I can see, the only function of any organization in overseeing the internet is to regulate and enforce domain names and registrations internationally. Maybe I’m wrong about this.
Phone lines have always been a utility.
It is not the phone lines...it is ensuring that the addresses are valid...that you are going to address you think you are going to...
The only people I have seen discussing a new internet are here on Free Republic...There are no others (people who fought to keep it here) stating this is doable...
As I said, glad to know you have the energy to build a new internet...Please, with all due respect, ping me when this happens as I have not seen much energy here beyond posting comments...
Here is video by a CYBER-SECURITY EXPERT, who in addition to the FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai , security expert Frank Gaffney and foreign affairs expert Ambassador John Bolton are very concerned...No mention of new internet bringing it back, Trump stopping it...I posted numerous articles on their comments as well as phone numbers of people to lobby to stop this—do a search...
Watch:
Video below, this cyber security expert, Morgan Wright, on For the Record Thurs, Sept. 28, with Britt Hume...Morgan Wright, says after Oct. 1, there is no putting the toothpaste in the tube...Brave New World where we don’t know if the address entered is really where we are going...
Starting at 22 minute mark~about 4 minutes...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1jGZnDzr_4
I’ve been wondering the same
Our public utilities are regulated...
Now the internet will be regulated by UN...they will determine domain addressing and ultimately free speech...
10 years from now the Internet will definitely be completely censored unless Trump wins and takes the Internet back from UN control
Icann now controls the Internet. The USA controlled the Internet from its beginning in the early 1990’s to yesterday.
The UN( The evil cabal of authoritarian dictators and Islamics) controls Icann which controls the Internet now thanks to evil Obama giving it away to them.
anyone who thinks these villains, won’t try to censor the Internet is insane.
Just one way they could do it is to put pressure on search engines like Google to put websites that they don’t approve on black lists(remove them from search results so people can’t find these websites).
when will this start? who knows but as the years go on you will see less and less websites that don’t espouse what these villains believe, nothing about freedom, nothing good, nothing critical of Islam , nothing pro USA or conservatism etc.
A poster here arthur wildfire posted an Icann appliction .
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:arthurwildfiremarch/index?tab=comments;brevity=full;options=no-change
Anyone think If I try to start a website called Islam Is the Problems .com that Icann will approve it? If you do then post your justification here if you dare.
All of you that didn’t help us stop this Obama giveaway and told is it was nothing , you own it and damn you all hell
I second your emotion!! 100% correct!
Thank you...
Obama is competing with Carter for bottom dweller. Carter gave away the Panama Canal and Obama gave away internet control. I would say Obama ‘wins’.
I’m a coder with years of experience and I’m definitely going to try to create a new
alternate Internet based on mesh networks , or die trying. I’ll keep you posted on any breakthroughs and or when we can port to the new Internet. I’ll start with these 2 links.
Seems like there might be a market for apps that link to other apps on other smartphones or pcs peer to peer like creating a distributed mesh internetwork
https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/13/building-a-brand-new-internet/
https://www.popularresistance.org/creating-an-alternative-internet-to-keep-the-nsa-out/
https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/13/building-a-brand-new-internet/
I’m a coder with years of experience and I’m definitely going to try to create a new
alternate Internet based on mesh networks , or die trying. I’ll keep you posted on any breakthroughs and or when we can port to the new Internet. I’ll start with these 2 links.
Seems like there might be a market for apps that link to other apps on other smartphones or pcs peer to peer like creating a distributed mesh internetwork. Im going to use erlang, websockets a lot of the whatsapp architecture
https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/13/building-a-brand-new-internet/
https://www.popularresistance.org/creating-an-alternative-internet-to-keep-the-nsa-out/
https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/13/building-a-brand-new-internet/
I have a network in my home now but talking to myself isn't very enlightening.
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.