
Terry Kramer, US ambassador to the World Conference on International Telecommunications 2012 (WCIT) spoke earlier this year at the Information Technology Council. (Photo: MANDEL NGAN/AFP/GettyImages)
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (TheBlaze/AP) — A U.N. conference weighing possible Internet rules shifted into a high-stakes showdown on Thursday after advancing a proposal for greater government oversight. The proposal was a blow to U.S.-led efforts to keep new regulations from touching the Net.
The move frames the ideological divide at the 193-nation gathering in Dubai, which is scheduled to wrap up Friday with its first revisions of global telecom rules since 1988 – years before the dawn of the Internet age.
“It’s not a crime to talk about Internet inside the ITU,” said the group’s secretary-general, Hamadoun Toure, suggesting high-level support to keep debate going on Internet issues.
In response, the head of the U.S. delegation, Ambassador Terry Kramer, said: “We do not believe the focus of this conference should be on the Internet and we did not come to this conference in anticipation of a discussion on the Internet.”
A Western bloc led by a powerhouse U.S. delegation seeks to block any U.N. rules on cyberspace, fearing they could squeeze Web commerce and open the door for more restrictions and monitoring by authoritarian regimes.
A rival group – including China, Russia, Gulf Arab states and others – continues to favor U.N. backing for a stronger sway by governments over all levels of Internet affairs.
They appeared to win a critical preliminary battle early Thursday when the meeting’s chairman declared consensus on a proposal for a more “active” government role in Internet dealings. There was no formal vote, but Mohammed Nasser al-Ghanim said he based his decision on “the temperature of the room” following marathon negotiations.
That brought an immediate backlash from the U.S. and its backers, which questioned the procedure and vowed to keep any new Internet rules from the final treaty by the U.N.’s International Telecommunications Union, or ITU.
The group – formed in the 1860s when the telegraph ushered in instant communications – has no powers to instantly change how the Internet operates. It also cannot compel reforms by states that already widely censor cyberspace.
But the U.S.-led coalition at the talks argues that any U.N. codes sanctioning greater government roles in the Net – even under the framework of state security – could be used as justification for even more controls from Web watchers in places such China, Iran and other nations.
The host United Arab Emirates announced stricter Internet laws last month that outlaw postings such as insulting rulers or calling for protests.
Nations favoring a heavier government hand are likely emboldened by getting their resolution adopted. However, it still needs to clear at least two more hurdles before it can be considered for the final document and will face strong opposition from the U.S. and others.
The Washington Post reported a senior administration official, who spoke anonymously given that the U.N.’s deliberations are internal, saying the U.S. would not sign the treaty.
“We can’t conceive of a signing the text without a major revision at this point,” the official said.
“We’re not going to submit to a treaty that regulates private networks,” the official continued, according to the Washington Post. “This began as a telecommunications negotiation and it became a referendum on the Internet, and the Internet doesn’t need new regulation.”
The U.S. team in Dubai includes heavy hitters from the tech world such as Microsoft Corp. and Google Inc., which also have stood up against proposals by European telecoms companies to charge Internet content providers for access to domestic markets around the world. Last week, U.S. Congress unanimously passed a resolution that would ban U.N. Internet control.
A statement from the Internet Society, an international group promoting openness in cyberspace, called the advancement of the proposal “clearly a disappointing development.”
Michael Beckerman, president and CEO of the Washington-based industry group The Internet Association, said the efforts for greater government controls could “forever alter” the current framework of the Net.
“The Internet is one of the greatest engines for economic growth, freedom and prosperity the world has ever known,” Beckerman said in the statement. “The unique nature of the Internet – free from government control and governed by multiple stakeholders – has unleashed unprecedented entrepreneurialism, creativity, innovation, and freedom far beyond imagination. Preserving a free Internet for all people is essential to the preservation of political and economic liberty.
Other issues on the table include calls for more transparency on roaming charges by mobile phone companies, efforts to fight Internet fraud and spam and creation of a worldwide emergency number for mobile phones and other devices.

























































































































media-bias-steals-elections
Dec. 17, 2012 at 3:24amI don’t see economic prosperity from the internet, there are too many open source tools out there for hackers to make the financial benefits impossible to attain? The internet is going to collapse due to hackers if they can not stop their mischief, which brings discredit on the technology industry which will loose money if people can not trust the people that work in those industries? Where is the peer pressure among hackers not to disrupt communications, if they value their industry?
Electronic components are replaced every few years, it’s not hard to remove open source tools and their ability to work with next generation electronics with proprietary systems? World wide emergency phone number? Why, are you expecting a SWAT team to arrive from France or China? I can’t even take that suggestion seriously.
Report this comment
Someone Smart
Dec. 18, 2012 at 3:40amThat doesn’t make any sense. Who makes money on the internet? Anybody who makes a website, like the Blaze for example, or any other website, through advertising. Who else makes money on the or off the internet? Developers who code it, graphic designers that create imagery. What about retail companies that want to sell there stuff online as well? And what about people that go on auction sites like ebay that sell stuff for a living? You talk about open source software as some kind of major burden for making money on the net, that makes no sense whatsoever. Open source software, the two things that it actually threatens is companies that make computer programs (other than purchasing/downloading is for offline use not online), and companies that make Server Operating System’s (like Microsoft vs Linux), and server related products. Other than that, open source is not a threat at all, and insisting that there should be things done to prevent the existence of it, that is completely absurd, clearly you don’t know what you’re talking about, and are just talking some fantasy stuff you just made up, and you’re solution makes less sense then even the idea. But you did have a point about some hackers, but that’s been the reality of the internet from even before its commercial beginning (before everyone started using it), hackers and computers, and internet have, and always will be synonymous.
Report this comment
watashbuddyfriend
Dec. 16, 2012 at 5:37pmAgain, it is time to defund the U.N.!
Report this comment
judyaz
Dec. 15, 2012 at 11:20pmAs grandmother of the internet (since Al Gore took credit for our early work at U.S. Army Communications Command Headquarters in Arizona) I would like to say, let the U.S. continue to control our own internet. If they world is enjoying the fruits of my labor, enjoy. But do not take what our Government began and turned over to industry when it was developed enough for business to risk making a profit, and allow a new world order, U.N. Government, take control and regulate all of us. Look at their human rights; look at their prejudice toward free countries. Will we let the Russian Mafia make rules and rob us blind, while other countries legislate over our freedoms, including speech and religion? WIll this end up being how none may barter or trade unless they wear the mark of the Beast?
God did not send an angel to lead me to sign up for Systems Engineering at the University, to be able to guide interdisciplinary work teams at Army Communications Electronics Engineering and Installation Agency in 1979, to allow the Beast to rule the internet. It was to give His messengers words “wings and let them go unto the world,” to “prepare a way for peace on earth and the coming of the Messiah.” He has given us free will. Which shall we choose?
Report this comment
LTC_Barber
Dec. 15, 2012 at 9:09pmThe UN doesn’t need to move out of the US, it needs to be moved to somewhere between Lexington, KY and Morgantown, WV. Could you image the carnage that would ensue. “Jed, why did you shoot him?” “He was a foreigner and looked like a revenuer! We don’t like revenuer in these parts.”
Report this comment
rbolt
Dec. 14, 2012 at 2:55pmThe U.N. needs to take a long walk off a short pier. We already have the great regulator, we don’t need another one.
Report this comment
jessieH
Dec. 14, 2012 at 2:26pmIt should read; “The United Nations takes another step closer to being kicked out of the United States, for good. Film of the teardown of their headquarters at eleven”
Report this comment
Anadara
Dec. 14, 2012 at 11:29amHere it is… Friday already, and guess what… the UN is still bent on controlling the entire globe. The sooner we kick the UN out of the US, the more secure we will be and the longer our liberty will last.
Report this comment
nocommie
Dec. 14, 2012 at 9:23amThe U.N. is by far the most corrupt organization on this planet next to the U.S. Gov.We need to fight these moon bats.I stand for freedom.I do not stand with a party.I am a free man.
Report this comment
DeniseJ
Dec. 14, 2012 at 5:58amThe U.N. – enabling dictators and wasting money. Kick them all out (make them pay their parking tickets first!) and sell the UN building.
Report this comment
NOTMOHAMMED
Dec. 14, 2012 at 5:01amHere comes another 0bama campaign promise.
Report this comment
Diane TX
Dec. 14, 2012 at 2:59amI wonder what the plan is? Is it to get US taxpayers to pay for internet service for those who live in shacks in some third world country?
If they don’t have indoor plumbing, what use would it be to them? Almost half the people in Egypt can’t read, yet the liars – Barack and Hilary, claim that they all went a-rioting because of a video they never knew existed.
Report this comment
UPEARS
Dec. 14, 2012 at 1:14amU.N. Don’t that mean United Natzis
Report this comment
UPEARS
Dec. 14, 2012 at 1:12amThe U.N. can SCREW OFF!!!!!!!! The U.N. should be disbanded……..It is useless
Report this comment
scotlass
Dec. 14, 2012 at 12:20amSnow Leopard I totally agree with you.
Report this comment
Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Dec. 13, 2012 at 11:48pmMonitoring by authoritarian regimes? You mean like us? What they are essentially saying is they don’t want competition. The good old USofA has some real good stuff cooked up for the sheep here and they don’t want the UN mucking up their plans.
Report this comment
BasketFullOfPuppies
Dec. 13, 2012 at 8:43pmWhy do I think that this is going to end with the U.S. saying, “Well, we were forced to sign and pass the treaty”?
Report this comment
Dkoonz
Dec. 13, 2012 at 9:51pmScrew the UN…Thats all.
Report this comment
AmericaMustBeFree
Dec. 13, 2012 at 7:37pmI am sure this administration will figure out a way to sneak it into some bill, that neither side will ever read. Dorta like Obamacare that has some awful nightmares inside of it! I no longer trust either party.. there are so few good men in Washington its pathetic. Those who may be good men are silenced or silent! God help America!
Report this comment
RealLiibertarian
Dec. 13, 2012 at 9:52pmInteresting that you should think this administration is most likely to try to implement government censorship of the internet. For years, I’ve been hearing the right say that they wanted more controls, so that they could eliminate ‘porn’, reduce the influence of groups they don’t like, and eliminate ‘anti-American ideas prevalent on the net. I see more threat in the actions of the religious loons and the love-it-or-leave-it brigade.
Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Dec. 13, 2012 at 7:31pmJust deport all the idiots in the UN building and use the property for something useful like a business that actually produces a product that people need. Dissolve the UN because they have bad intentions for the US and the world.
Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Dec. 13, 2012 at 7:59pmHow about deposit them all in the UN Building, weld the doors shut, and shove the entire place into the ocean.
Report this comment
Al J Zira
Dec. 13, 2012 at 8:24pmI like Snow’s idea, but they have to let Hillary, Susan Rice, Harry Reid, Pelosi, Obama, Holder and anyone else I haven’t named but fits the bill into the building before we cast off.
Report this comment