China: “US Must Hand Over Internet Control to the World”

The Government of China said today that the US must hand over control of the Internet to the world.

The Government’s position was made in today daily newspaper, The People’s Daily which “provides direct information on the policies and viewpoints of the Communist Party of China (CPC)“.

Here is the full story of what China had to say:

“”The Internet has become one of the most important resources in the world in just a few decades, but the governance mechanism for such an important international resource is still dominated by a private sector organization and a single country.”

“The U.S. government said in a statement on July 1, 2005 that its Commerce Department would continue to support the work of Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), and indefinitely retain oversight of the Internet’s 13 root servers.”

“This indicated the U.S. decision to retain ultimate control over the global Internet, which enabled it to unilaterally close the Internet of another country.”

“A suddenly paralyzed Internet would definitely cause huge social and economic losses to the country.”

“More and more countries are beginning to question the U.S. control over the world’s Internet as the international resource should be managed and supervised by all countries together.”

“However, the United States has conducted a pre-emptive strike, and refused to give up control over the Internet in the name of protecting the resource.”

“The refusal reflects its hegemonic mentality and double standards”.

“The United States controls and owns all cyberspaces in the world, and other countries can only lease Internet addresses and domain names from the United States, leading to the U.S. hegemonic monopoly over the world’s Internet”.

Of course this is not the 1st time a country has called for the US to turn control over the domain name system to the UN or blasted ICANN.

In May of this year the House held a hearing on a pending international proposal sponsored by China, Russia, India and Brazil  to turn control of the internet to the UN.

According to theHill.com story a vote on the proposal maybe taken in Dubai in December during a UN conference.

 

Comments

  1. Michael H. Berkens says

    Avtal

    “The US seizure of .com domains makes a kind of sense, because the .com registry is run by a US company, under US jurisdiction. What would be more alarming is if the US forced ICANN, as a US-based organization, to shut down the ccTLDs of out-of-favor countries, such as Iran and Cuba. So far, at least, the US government has had the good sense not to do this.””

    ICANN has no control over the operation of a ccTLD nor does the US government, so its not the matter of having “”he good sense not to do this”” they can’t do it

    If ICANN control went to the UN then Verisign’s contract to run the .com/.net registry may go to another company, whose headquarters are not in the US but say in Switzerland , then US law wouldn’t apply to .com’s and .net’s

  2. says

    Hi Michael:

    Thank you for noting that the United States has not been so effective at guarding it’s universally shared, “.COM” name space.

    It’s not so much the United States Government, thats been delinquent in guarding the “.COM” name space. It’s very specifically, the Commerce Departments assigned guardian and their team: ICANN with VeriSign & Network Solutions.

    There is a published case approaching Your Federal Court in Virginia …(I say “Your” because; I’m Canadian, capitalizing on the global use of .COM for my business as Pro Se Plaintiff … Schreiber v Dunabin et al)… illustrating that those three, are accepting “contributory infringement” via KNOWN negligent management of their own rules, by an English company ~ CentralNic ~ who have engineered a system, enticing infringement, at the 3rd level, via the RIPE system in Holland.

    Readers … YOU DO NOT want the UN involved! The UN are instrumental in running WIPO and have aided CentralNic in the deliberation of cases. Cases which WIPO, have no business adjudicating!

    I’ve sent WIPO a Registered Letter, CC the US FDC in Va, requesting they explain themselves, to the US Courts. In part because their vague statistics don’t explain things; and also because I need these vague details, for may case, against their “CLIENT”.

    The internet MUST BE held in the United States; because in America, you have a great balance of unbridled commerce, team sportsmanship and a great justice system, to counter balance.

    Granted … While I’ve not yet won, I’ve done sufficient research to warrant the exercise of exposing my ‘tiny’ self against these ‘GIGANTIC’ enterprises, to a point where I know I’ve built a sound case.

    In China, Russia, Syria, all the Countries on the African Continent & more, are not able to illustrate a record of such fine balance.

    Regarding the opinions of some “Ugly American’s” in this forum, I sincerely wish you’d button it & remain silent, as you do your great nation no favours.

    Fortunately, the smarter world accepts that in every basket, you’ll find a bad apple.

    Cheers Graham.

  3. John Berryhill says

    First off, the US is not “controlling the internet”. Nobody puts a gun to anyone’s head and forces them to use the IANA root. Judging by the relative success of alternative root systems and namespaces, the ISP market prefers the IANA root, but that’s not somehow the result of any coercive inducement by the US to use the IANA root.

    Secondly, that civil complaint looks more like a ransom note than anything which is going to get any traction. And, please spare us the usual “pro se litigant on an important crusade” stuff here.

  4. says

    Sounds resentment of the Britsh empire a few century’s ago when it ruled the continents and seven seas. They too felt compelled to “hang on to power” for worldly domination and financial gain, we all what happened there!

  5. says

    Hi John:

    Thanks for the ~ unofficial ~ ICANN feedback & position !!

    UK.com … IS NOT an alternative “Root System” it’s a website / domain name, enticing infringers, thereby being contributory to infringement.

    ICANN should have shut-down CentralNic years ago! ICANN wrote the rules, they just didn’t follow them.

    After all my problem involves a Registered Name Holder, of a Domain Name, presenting as a “Registry”. >>> “The idea came about as a direct result of conversations between the late Jon Postel (“Father of the Internet”) and Stephen Dyer (Chairman of NomiNation) in 1995. Jon suggested the use of uk.com to compete with co.uk at a time when the proposed price of the co.uk name was �200 (about $300 US).” << http://archive.icann.org/en/dnso/additionalpage.htm < to make it so.

    Cheers, Graham.

  6. Satinderbir Singh says

    Another example of us control over internet resources is the control over domain extensions such as .gov or army.mil. Each country should have fair rights to use .gov extension but .gov by default would mean a US GOVT site. Other countries like India or UK use .gov.in or .gov.uk. Why not US free .gov extension and use .gov.us to be in fair use of internet resources? Similarly evey country have right to generic name army.mil, but its currently hijacked by US. These are just two examples but there is lot more into it.

  7. josh says

    @unknowdomainer, try googling the facts behind oil and how the rest of the world has to buy it..in US dollars! Feel forunate that in the early 70′s Nixon pledged protection to S.A. in exchange for the petrol dollar. Seems everytime a country like Iran, Lybia etc chooses to sell in other dollars or gold they need to be handled..errr war. As long as the US has the petrol dollar in motion it stays on top, that is why your gas prices are relatively cheap, they print what they need to buy, other countries have to have the funds, kind of, we see that debt issue coming to a head now.

  8. Charles says

    At Josh … Actually Josh we have much more freedom and rights than we did in the first half of the 1900′s. In 1938 you could easily have your door kicked in and be dragged off to some prison camp. Same after the war. If you were thought to be Red they didn’t have to read you any Miranda rights. They just hauled your ass away. You’re just dead wrong on that point.

    As far as the US maintaining control of the internet, you can make a list a mile long of the bad things that the US could do with the internet but that list would pale in comparison to what might happen to us and the internet if other countries become involved. The Chinese already own us financially. I don’t think that it would be wise to give them or ANY other country any more access to our financial systems than they already have. They have us by the balls in debt. We don’t want the same to happen to our technology, financial systems, basically everything. Are you old enough to remember a time when Russia, China and Germany would have swarmed our country with a billion men … yes, one Billion soldiers, had we given them the opportunity. It wouldn’t be wise to test them again.

  9. josh says

    @charles, “Actually Josh we have much more freedom and rights than we did in the first half of the 1900′s. In 1938 you could easily have your door kicked in and be dragged off to some prison camp.”

    “You’re just dead wrong on that point.”

    Am I? I suggest you research a bit about what the current president has suggested and I believe passed into law concerning indefinite detainment the NDAA. What does it matter how many more “freedoms” you have now vs 70 years ago if they are being taken back or new one’s introduced. Don’t get me wrong this is no communist China comparison but the fact is if they have the right they will eventually use it and if against even one citizen, against all. Everything now is “terrorism” or defined as a terroist act. If need be your government will make you feel like it is 1930′s again.

  10. Charles says

    The Dollar … supreme currency??? You don’t print eight trillion bills with no gold behind them and not devalue the dollar. To an outsider it would appear that the US is doing everything in its power to destroy the dollar. But hey, it does help decrease the trade deficit.

  11. josh says

    @Charles, ok, supremem oil dollar lol

    I do agree with you, the dollar has devalued greatly since its invention. So much so some now would say the banks (fed) want it destroyed yet no one says that out loud ;) Ahhh conspiracy theory, keeps the blood going.

    It is said all the bills that China has dumped this last year has gone directly to physical Gold, wonder why.

    Something is cooking, something big but what exactly we will not know for a while or until the train falls off the track, over the cliff whatever way youd like to put it. I am sure the fed will think of a new way to rob your and other countries in due time.

Comment Policy:

TheDomains.com welcomes reader comments. Please follow these simple rules:

  • Stay on topic
  • Refrain from personal attacks
  • Avoid profanity
  • Links should be related to the topic of the post
  • No spamming. Listing domains, products, or services will get the comment deleted

We reserve the right to remove comments if we deem it necessary.

Join the Discussion