Why would Obama push to move Internet control from the USA to an international body? Seriously, why?
(From The Wall Street Journal)
The Constitution says Congress must approve the sale of government property. The Icann contract is government property worth billions of dollars, yet the Obama administration has ignored the requirement to seek congressional approval. “Absent clear legal certainty, moving forward with the transition could have devastating consequences for internet users,” the legislators write, because litigation would create questions about who has authority to award and manage internet addresses.
Each of these objections is enough to retain U.S. oversight, but the broader point is that the internet ain’t broke and doesn’t need fixing. Icann’s stakeholders—developers, engineers, network operators and entrepreneurs—are free to operate an open internet because U.S. protection prevents Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and other authoritarian regimes from meddling. The Obama administration may not be comfortable with American exceptionalism, but the internet fosters free speech and innovation because it was built in the image of the U.S.
Is it really this? Is it really that Obama takes umbrage with American “exceptionalism.” I think it might just be. Not to say that the USA is perfect. Sadly far far from it. However, do we want Saudi Arabia weighing in on the flow of information through the Internet via some United Nations body? How long until that goes horribly wrong?
By which of course I mean “horribly” for you and me and lovers of liberty. For the despots UN ICANN control will be great.