Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

While I think the question "Who should be in charge of the Internet?" is a fascinating one, framing the question as a "Bellhead/Nethead" one seems to miss a much larger issue: as the Internet becomes mission critical for all aspects of human life, governments around the world are going to intervene and start regulating the medium in a serious way. That's the promise and threat of the World Summit on the Information Society - as world governments realize this new medium matters, they want to ensure that they've got a hand in governing it. Predictably, this freaks out both netheads and bellheads, neither of whom have a great deal of confidence in the UN's ability to set technical standards... but it's equally unsettling for the government of Ghana to discover that they don't control the ".gh" domain name and that the process for reclaiming their property is governed by an organization that they - rightly or wrongly - don't see themselves adequately represented by.

Whether or not the ITU tries to take over ICANN, there's a serious fight over internet governance at the moment that's WAY broader than the FCC versus the greybeards. The US has generally taken a hands-off approach to the Internet, assuming that unfettered market forces will do a better job of setting standards than the government. That's unlikely to be the attitude many world governments take...

I see from the conference agenda that the gathering appeared to be a conversation about American regulation of the 'net. Is that the best way to frame a conversation about an inherently international medium?

Thanks, Ethan. It's good to be reminded of the broader context. But there's _also_ a fight with the FCC that needs to be won. That's what this conference was about.