There may be a lot of fulminating at next
week's UN conference on Internet regulation, but it's not likely to have
a major impact. "I expect very little of substance to change," said law
professor Derek Bambauer. "This is partly because of the nature of this
type of international conference, and partly because there is no
consensus on change, and partly because the U.S. still has a practical
veto."
There may be a lot of fulminating at next
week's UN conference on Internet regulation, but it's not likely to have
a major impact. "I expect very little of substance to change," said law
professor Derek Bambauer. "This is partly because of the nature of this
type of international conference, and partly because there is no
consensus on change, and partly because the U.S. still has a practical
veto."
The European Union announced
on Friday that it would oppose attempts to increase regulation of the
Internet at a United Nations conference that will take place next week
in Dubai. This move comes as some countries have called for tighter
rules on Web service providers and phone operators.
The International Telecommunications Union, an agency within the
United Nations, is hosting the World Conference on International
Telecommunications (WCIT) beginning Monday. The goal of the event is to
update the International Telecommunications Regulations, a decades-old
treaty. Representatives from 190 governments will meet in Dubai to hash
out their differences, with some expected to push for tighter control of
the Web.
"The WCIT-12 conference is going to be fascinating," said Derek E.
Bambauer, associate professor of law at the University of Arizona's
James E. Rogers College of Law. "It is in many ways going to refight the battles of the World Summit on the Information Society meetings."
The European Commission did not respond to our request for further details.
Can the Web Be Reined In?
The first notable consideration is whether it is even possible to more
tightly regulate the Web, even if a treaty were to call for it.
"You can legislate but not control it," said Billy Pidgeon, senior analyst for
Inside Network. "If someone breaks the law, you can take them to court, but you can't really control the Internet."
However, that may not stop some nations from trying.
"There is the control such as what Syria has done, where you shut it
down -- but it isn't something that is a major cause for worry," Pidgeon
told TechNewsWorld.
"But there is no reason to do it," he added. "There are probably
industry groups and countries that will want to increase regulations,
but it isn't something anyone should want. As long as there are
organizations that oversee the Internet that remain independent -- and
they should remain so -- any sort of legislation is going to be
ineffective anyway."
Some nations may see it another way, though -- such as "China,
Russia, and other countries that are concerned about the impact of free
speech on their governments," said Josh Crandall, principal analyst at
Netpop Research.
More Than Flame Wars
When individuals get into disputes online -- whether in a forum, chat
room or other discussion-type setting -- things can get heated,
resulting in so-called flame wars. Could a similar war of words erupt at
the WCIT-12?
"There are a number of issues that could heat up," said Bambauer. "I think there are likely to be three that will flare."
The first could involve tariffs and fees for Internet connectivity,
as a number of entities -- such as ISPs and even some governments --
could likely look to change the cost structure for connections, Bambauer
told TechNewsWorld.
"Right now, both sides of the connection pay for bandwidth," he
noted. "Google pays for its connectivity -- I pay for mine. But Google
does not pay directly to access me or any other user. Telecommunications
companies would like to charge more to companies whose content
comprises a larger share of their traffic."
This isn't just an international political issue, Bambauer stressed,
as implementing it could likely lead to significant shifts in costs and
would require some architectural changes to put metering in place.
Governance Issues
The second issue that could come out of the conference is governance, which is likely to remain a perennial hot-button issue.
"Right now, governance is highly distributed, but the flashpoint around IP addresses and domain names is ICANN," said Bambauer.
"ICANN emerged out of the initial fights over Internet governance in
the 1990s and has had a complicated relationship with the U.S.
government," he explained. "It is perceived by many other countries as
being too tied to the U.S. -- effectively giving the U.S. a veto over
governance decisions."
At present, the leading contender to take over some or all of ICANN's
functions is the ITU, which Bambauer noted may want in on the Internet
since its current role -- coordinating the international telephone
system -- is becoming increasingly irrelevant.
"The ITU is seen by the U.S. and civil society groups, though, as too
closely tied to governments and insufficiently concerned with other
stakeholders," explained Bambauer. "ICANN tries hard to paint itself as a
multi-stakeholder institution, [while] the ITU is trying hard at the
moment to downplay questions of Internet governance, which is a sure
sign that it's a live issue at WCIT."
Censorship Controversy
The last issue is censorship, said Bambauer, with countries such as
Russia recently having moved to tighten controls over free expression
online.
"In many ways, this is also tied to governance, since censoring
countries want deference to national governments over online controls,
and also want to be able to frame questions of censorship as part of
national security or information security initiatives," he stressed.
Given the design of the Internet, this prompts the original question:
whether any amount of regulation can actually resolve anything.
"From its birth, the Internet was designed to be a multi-nodal,
resilient system, capable of withstanding nuclear war," Crandall told
TechNewsWorld.
"Data traveling through the Internet wants to be free, and many
products have been developed to ensure the security of messages flowing
through it," he said.
"If a government thinks it's necessary to restrict transmissions, it
can set up roadblocks, as China has done with its Internet Great Wall,"
Crandall emphasized. "But those systems tend to be the result of
internal domestic policies rather than international agreements."
So, will anything actually get accomplished, even as the EU has stated it opposition to regulation?
"In terms of the range of outcomes, I think it is ironically quite
narrow," said Bambauer. "I expect very little of substance to change.
This is partly because of the nature of this type of international
conference, and partly because there is no consensus on change -- and
partly because the U.S. still has a practical veto over many of these
decisions, given its relationship with ICANN."
