The future of the digital world has been the subject of heated argument, and it is unclear whether it will in fact available to all
Daniel Thomas (Daniel Thomas), Richard Waters (Richard Waters), James Fontanella-Khan (James Fontanella-Khan)
The man standing in the center of a huge stadium, presses old computer terminal, and in the darkness before the eyes of billions of viewers around the world flashing message: "This is for all."
It was Sir Tim Berners-Lee, who worked on the World Wide Web, and then lost control of it to others. This episode is an extravagant ceremony of the Olympic Games in London demonstrated how his invention launched the digital revolution - just as much as its predecessor, industrial and social revolution.
Two decades after its discovery the future of the digital world has been the subject of heated argument: many are wondering whether it's actually available to all.
In December 2012, the new Dubai World Conference of International Communication, which will be a number of legal rules governing the Internet - a worldwide network, which already connects more than two billion people, the number of users is growing daily by 500,000 people and which became the basis for the web, by Tim Berners-Lee.
Technically, the conference will discuss the international agreements to regulate telecommunications, but some proposals go beyond the fact that many users find sufficient control of the Internet.
This struggle is a long history of a closed-door meeting hall of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) - one of the UN agencies. Western nations, in particular - the U.S. and EU member states do not want to provide ITU with additional powers, as it can have an indirect support to dictatorial regimes in the Middle East, Eastern Europe and Asia. These modes are often accused of using network monitoring capabilities to persecute political dissidents.
"If a few years ago led to new rules that allow more control over the internet, the" Arab Spring "would not come - said one EU diplomat influential. - Internet should be left free and untouched, the less we get involved in it, the better" .
Most disputes erupt around the wording of law that should be taken at a conference in Dubai. Some of the proposals that have been published ITU and who has already read the Member States of the organization, considered by many to create a favorable environment for government intervention in the content and access to the Internet. Because of the vague wording of the government will be able to block anything - from spam to allegedly illegal material of a political nature.
Proponents of free online try to avoid vague language on national sovereignty and security, which can be used as a cover to legitimize censorship, secret surveillance and blocking sites.
"For many of the proposals are well-intentioned, but they can also be a legal ground for restricting freedom of expression," - said Vint Cerf (Vint Cerf), in which Google is often called the "chief evangelist for the Internet."
According to the nonprofit group Internet Society, a purely technical (at first glance) suggestions for names, numbers and addresses of distribution websites can become a tool for the destruction of freedom and openness.
"At stake is the future of the Internet - said Mr. Cerf. - Some countries have sought to strengthen national control over the Internet. Not surprisingly, behind this authoritarian regimes in the first place - Russia and China. "
In fact, the recommendations to be adopted at a conference in Dubai, are unlikely to seriously affect the situation in most authoritarian states. In countries such as Iran and North Korea, there is strict censorship or a complete ban on the internet. In August, the list of banned words in China added, and it was included in the name of Gu Kylan - wife of Bo Xilai, who until recently was one of the most powerful officials in the country. For the murder, she was sentenced to death with reprieve.
If we do not take into account concerns about politics and human rights, the debate over the ownership of the Internet have a commercial background.
The hottest battle between representatives of 193 countries, which should take part in a conference in Dubai, will unfold over the question of whether to allow the telecommunications group, to charge for digital content providers access to their networks.
Some telecom companies are increasingly expressing their displeasure mechanisms of the Internet. According to them, they take on the hard work of physical infrastructure and do not have access to digital gold-bearing sources that have helped companies such as Google, to make great fortunes. As once said the head of one of the telecom companies, they took care of all the costs of building roads in the hope of seeing a return on their investment. Now, "car makers" want to make a network free.
Some telecommunications companies want to get right to charge content providers highly profitable return for guarantees smooth operation of infrastructure. Many Western politicians and Internet activists are hostile to the idea of charging, calling it a kind of "tax" on the internet. Latent threat in this case is that telecom companies can reduce the speed of websites, which will increase the chances of second-class citizens in the new digital world.
Given these political and commercial disputes, it is not surprising that the ITU Secretary General Dr. Hamadoun Toure (Hamadoun Touré) recognizes that at a conference in Dubai may flare up with serious arguments.
He hopes that the conference participants will be able to take the "Ten Commandments" or universal rules of global communications. According to him, these commandments must not only set standards and rules, they should "prepare the ground for competition, innovation and economic growth." Even the mention of the economy in the debate around the internet may seem objectionable to those who believe the network bastion of the free market and a guarantee of a free society.
The last time members of the group gathered for the revision of international standards in telecommunications in 1988, when the Internet was in its infancy, and, according to Dr. Touré, the standards need to be improved.
"In 1988, we only had a voice, - he said in an interview with reporters, Financial Times. - Now is the time, distance and place do not matter ... Someone has to pave the road."
He rejects the view that "the UN is trying to take over the Internet", adding that the need to work together. "All stakeholders should be involved in this work. It is this phone made in China, working in Brazil. Give a definition - it is a problem ... so we need to work under a common denominator, according to uniform standards. We have no right to make mistakes. "
However, some participants of the conference want to maintain the status quo. According to them, ITU attempts deception to expand their reach by going beyond the traditional telecommunications and, thus, allow outside interests to gain control over the Internet.
Extending the jurisdiction of ITU in the new field of the internet can lead to a "highly undesirable" results, according to Tony Rutkowski (Tony Rutkowski), an expert in the field of Internet, who helped organize the conference in 1988.
According to him, some delegates pursue "extreme goals" for various reasons, religious, political and social nature.
***
Network neutrality is likely to be the most sensitive issue. This issue is at the heart of the dispute is whether telecommunications companies to charge content providers.
Governments in a number of European countries are considering legislation to preserve network neutrality, but the representatives of the telecommunications industry believe that it may prevent them from maintaining the physical infrastructure of the Internet in the financial sense.
"Network neutrality - it's like one size fits all. And you know what? One size is not for everyone, "- says Ben Fervaayen (Ben Verwaayen), CEO Alkatel-Lucent. According to him, the telecommunications company - is the missing link in the value chain between content providers and manufacturers of electronic equipment.
Telecommunications infrastructure needs to increase investment in order to be able to meet the requirements for data volume is doubling every year, even in countries such as the United Kingdom and the USA. Given that connects to the Internet more and more people in Africa and Asia, and fears that the existing infrastructure can not withstand the load, it is justified.
Dr Touré noted the need to guarantee investment in the future that may seem to many tacit support of the positions of major telecommunications groups. "Who is going to build a network? Unless it can develop without investment? No. "
Etno, lobbying organization, acting in the interests of the major telecom operators in Europe, invited the UN to recognize their right to charge content providers for traffic prioritization. Chairman of the Board Etno Luigi Gambardella (Luigi Gambardella) argues that the income statements to bind to the investment needs dictated by the growth of Internet traffic.
Stephen Richard (Stéphane Richard), Director General of France Telecom, rejected the suggestion that it might be a 'tax' on the internet. "I think our business position does not allow us to collect this tax from Google or any other major supplier of traffic."
However, critics say, it may mean that those who do not pay telecommunications companies may be in a "slow right lane." Some have also voiced concern that it required the creation of a supervisory body, and this in turn can lead to abuses.
Even with the above, representatives Etno believe they can count on the support of the countries of Asia and the Middle East, and that they already have supporters in the face of North America and Europe, despite initial concerns in government circles.
The European Commission is still reflecting on what is its place in this commercial relationship. European Commissioner for Digital Development Neelie Kroes (Neelie Kroes) reported FT, that "in commercial negotiations must address a number of issues and to create a foundation for investment, which will allow all the participants along the value chain to benefit from the huge growth potential of the online economy."
However, according to Mr. Cerf, these price structure against the principles of the Internet because they can impede innovation. "When Larry Page and Sergey Brin started Google, they did not need to enter into a contract with each provider of Internet services in the world. It reminds me of a model of behavior, where your temple a gun and say, "You make a lot of money. Share with us. " The alternative is a healthy competition and improve their own additional services. "
***
According to many experts, the conference in Dubai may prove fruitless.
All ITU Member States have the right to vote, and within the organization is now in pacts are complex, backed by powerful countries, but Dr. Toure insists that during his term decisions will be made only with the consent of all participants.
"No proposal will be accepted, unless there is a consensus," - he added.
However, according to many observers, it will be impossible, given the scale of disputes flaring up around offers, so lobbyists now they say that the discussion of controversial proposals for the management of the Internet, will be postponed until next year.
The EU is determined to not provide ITU additional powers in regulating the Internet in general.
This echoes the position of the EU The original U.S. proposal, published on August 3, which states that Washington will prevent any attempt to expand the powers of ITU in the management and Internet content. In June, Robert McDowell (Robert McDowell), a commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, said that the expansion of control over the Internet must be stopped. "Given the potential for rapid growth, the proposed amendments that seem insignificant today, can be fatal to the growth of wealth and expand freedom tomorrow," - he said.
Freedom, which are limited in improving control tools
As they say, Daniel Thomas (Daniel Thomas) and Katherine Hill (Kathrin Hille), Internet - is not such a free, as it may seem to many people in Western countries. Governments have a larger number of closely monitoring the use of the network in their own countries - and this is not only authoritarian regimes, which plays an active role in monitoring the Internet.
Nowhere is such limitations are seen in Asia and the Middle East. Internet users in China, for example, can not enter into foreign websites, and the level of censorship on its own Chinese site has grown considerably over the past three years.
To block any suspected malicious foreign information in China uses the principle of keyword filtering. Bypass such censorship can however leverage internal controls are becoming more ubiquitous: the censors working at both the administrative level and at the level of the various online services - such as blogs, search engines and chat rooms. No user can hide their identity for a long time. Almost daily to the list of restricted keywords are added all new combinations: their entry into the search box, or has no effect or leads to encrypt or destroy posts in microblogs.
Iran has taken another step to control: the government plans to completely block access to the World Wide Web for the benefit of its own internal network. According to Iranian officials, this will help prevent cyber attacks and espionage, backed by foreign powers, but many believe that this will also help to conduct online monitoring the activities of enemies of the regime. Many human rights activists have accused Tehran of filtering and control of Internet traffic.
Other countries in the Middle East is also a content filter and block access to restricted sites, especially those where you can find information about the protest movement in the region, called the "Arab Spring."
Statements in favor of establishing such control sound and developed countries. For example, the Australian Government has put forward a proposal to create a filtration system that could block the web address and a website with domain names.
On the commercial level, many accused the European telecommunications group in the speed limit access to applications, you can instantly send messages - such as Skype, because they threaten the business major providers of mobile communications services.
