[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]
The Wall Street Journal is running [/FONT][FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]a fascinating opinion piece[/FONT][FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif] about the possible impact of new gTLDs and IDNs.* Author L. Gordon Crovitz posits that multiplying TLDs and languages on the Net may make it easier for authoritarian governments to attempt to stifle free-speech and meddle in what the article says is currently a "happy state of affairs" in which "one of the marvels of the Internet is that it is self-governing, with private groups of engineers and technology companies doing their best to keep it up and running without political interference."
I fully agree with what I think is a very good summary of why the ICANN system of governance suits the Internet to a tee. Lets not forget, after all, that both ICANN and the Internet are forays into what only a few years ago was just unknown territory. I think it's safe to say there's never been a medium like the Internet, and there's never been a body of governance like ICANN. Think what went before and you're bound to get the point: telex, print newspapers, cassette tapes and VHS for the Internet… the UN for ICANN.
So although the WSJ article seems right on the money when it describes a pioneering model of governance which shields the Internet from the ravages of too much government intervention, I'm not sure I get the link being made to new TLDs and IDNs. ICANN, says the WSJ, "plans to open the door to many new Web addresses and to give better access to non-English-language users." This, we are told, "could result in authoritarian governments insisting on more influence."[/FONT]
Continue reading "Do new TLDs and IDNs mean tighter government control?"
Pour en lire plus...
The Wall Street Journal is running [/FONT][FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]a fascinating opinion piece[/FONT][FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif] about the possible impact of new gTLDs and IDNs.* Author L. Gordon Crovitz posits that multiplying TLDs and languages on the Net may make it easier for authoritarian governments to attempt to stifle free-speech and meddle in what the article says is currently a "happy state of affairs" in which "one of the marvels of the Internet is that it is self-governing, with private groups of engineers and technology companies doing their best to keep it up and running without political interference."
I fully agree with what I think is a very good summary of why the ICANN system of governance suits the Internet to a tee. Lets not forget, after all, that both ICANN and the Internet are forays into what only a few years ago was just unknown territory. I think it's safe to say there's never been a medium like the Internet, and there's never been a body of governance like ICANN. Think what went before and you're bound to get the point: telex, print newspapers, cassette tapes and VHS for the Internet… the UN for ICANN.
So although the WSJ article seems right on the money when it describes a pioneering model of governance which shields the Internet from the ravages of too much government intervention, I'm not sure I get the link being made to new TLDs and IDNs. ICANN, says the WSJ, "plans to open the door to many new Web addresses and to give better access to non-English-language users." This, we are told, "could result in authoritarian governments insisting on more influence."[/FONT]
Continue reading "Do new TLDs and IDNs mean tighter government control?"
Pour en lire plus...
