The Hypocrisy Of Congress: As Big A Threat To The Internet As The UN They're Condemning
from the we-don't-regulate-the-internet,-except-when-we-do dept
While it's great to see Congress continue to speak out against the UN's dangerous efforts to tax and track the internet to help out governments and local telco monopolies, it's pretty ridiculous for Congress to pretend that it's declaring "hands off the internet" when it has its own hands all over the internet these days. As Jerry Brito and Adam Theirer write, over at the Atlantic, if Congress is really serious about supporting a free and open internet, it should look in the mirror first:It goes on to discuss other proposals to regulate parts of the internet, including CISPA and other online security laws. Of course, in each of these cases, the politicians in Congress will come out with a litany of reasons why it "makes sense" (or more accurately "we have to do something!") to pass these laws. But that pre-supposes that all those countries that Congress is now condemning for wanting more ability to spy on and control citizens don't have reasons to do so. Given the increasing evidence that the US government, via the NSA, is already spying on wide swaths of the population -- and Congress' apparent total lack of concern about this, it's incredibly hypocritical to pretend that the US government supports a free and open internet with privacy protections for citizens, when its own actions reveal something very, very different.The fear that the ITU might be looking to exert greater control over cyberspace at the conference has led to a rare Kumbaya moment in U.S. tech politics. Everyone -- left, right, and center -- is rallying around the flag in opposition to potential UN regulation of the Internet. At a recent congressional hearing, one lawmaker after another lined up and took a turn engaging in the UN-bashing. From the tone of the hearing, and the language of the House resolution, we are being asked to believe that "the position of the United States Government has been and is to advocate for the flow of information free from government control."
If only it were true. The reality is that Congress increasingly has its paws all over the Internet. Lawmakers and regulators are busier than ever trying to expand the horizons of cyber-control across the board: copyright mandates, cybersecurity rules, privacy regulations, speech controls, and much more.
Earlier this year, Congress tried to meddle with the Internet's addressing system in order to blacklist sites that allegedly infringe copyrights -- a practice not unlike that employed by the Chinese to censor political speech. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) may have targeted pirates, but its collateral damage would have been the very "stable and secure" Internet Congress now wants "free from government control." A wave of furious protests online forced Congress to abandon the issue, at least for the moment.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cispa, congress, internet regulation, itu, sopa, united nations
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Best course for the public
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Best course for the public
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Best course for the public
While the current crop of ignorant regulators go at regulating the internet like a monkey trying to f*ck a football; the next generation of informed (evil!) "digital native" regulators will go at f*cking the internet with the precision of a Sybian--and they will likely be effective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Best course for the public
almost as funny as:
the position of the United States Government has been and is to advocate for the flow of information free from government control.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Best course for the public
If we believe the head of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), then they don't really want control, they just want money.
“UN doesn't want to take over Internet, does want to help telcos profit” by Cyrus Farivar, Ars Technica, Jun 20, 2012
So Hamadoun Touré's motivation is real simple. He helps national telcos skim the cream off the internet, and in turn, the nat telcos kick back bribes his way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Best course for the public
We're a bunch of nerds that are sick of clueless legislators trying to regulate things that are beyond their comprehension. As time goes on, I believe more people like us will (temporarily) forgo our fun careers for temporary forays into politics to help fix this partisan mess that mires our country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Best course for the public
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Best course for the public
Frankly I'm more concerned about the corrupting influence of power. In every speech I've given I've promised to stay true to my roots, but I understand why nobody would believe that. It sounds too much like what every politician has ever said...ever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Best course for the public
Unfortunately, they never seem to notice it when they are the one causing the problem, and the only solutions they know how to offer are legal solutions. For every person that hates them and tells them they're wrong, there's someone else supporting them and urging them on. I'm positive every single one of them believes they're are doing good work that benefits the public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Best course for the public
It's just in how you play it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Best course for the public
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fixed it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The You-Enn is different because it ends in Enn not Ess. Even a dyslexic can tell them apart.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do regulators even do anything
Financial regulators, media regulators, and others - as far as I can see they do fuck all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do regulators even do anything
Without regulators, we'd have to be surprised by the variety and frequency of corporations screwing us over--but with regulators there is a certain form their screwing must take.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Do regulators even do anything
Mmmm. Don't think I believe that anymore. Not —at least— in the US. Look, used to be that the so-called Western democracies tried to pay lip service to concepts like “due process” and “rule of law”. Now, not so much.
For recent example, remember the last post here at Techdirt about the Dajaz1 seizure? Some of the trollish commentators were yelling, “You don't get an adversary hearing!”
That's actually kind of shocking to me. But I'm a child of the cold war —will always be a child of the cold war— and grew up in the midst of a generation-spanning ideological struggle.
The younger kids don't seem to have gotten the indoctrination. They don't understand “what makes us different from the Soviets”. And, thus, they're ok with seizing websites like Dajaz1 with secret "evidence" and no opportunity for a hearing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The radical right wing calls it American Exceptionalism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hypocrites
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ironic
Ironic.
The US does have control of the Internet, they run the root nameservers.
They also run some of the Whois services, and one of the authorites that assigns IP addresses.
So, they don't want anyone else to control the Internet?
Try looking in the mirror!
Truly the US is 'one of the tomatoes in the mirror', and can't recognize their own face anymore.
They look and see the US, but what I see is China, Russia, etc.
Look, we're all human, therefore we are similar than we realize. Russians, Americans, etc. it makes no difference, we are all generally the same when it comes down to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]