Re: [OT] ICANN to move to multi-staker body and fear of censorship by Governments.
at bottom :-
On 21/03/2016, shirish शिरीष <email@example.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Recently there was an announcement that ICANN operations would no
> longer be a U.S. body but will have multi-stakeholder with governments
> having more of a say. This is a not a new idea but has been in the
> water for quite sometime. See -
> for a backgrounder.
> It recently became news as it is now being shared in mainstream news
> and September 30, 2016 is the new date set.
> The Hindu however has more of an inside scoop of the real reasons for
> the hand-over, Snowdem relevations being part of it -
> Business standard also has some interesting comments -
> "Meanwhile, the likes of Republican presidential candidate Senator Ted
> Cruz complain that allowing Russia, China and other authoritarian
> regimes a say jeopardises free speech online." - Business Standard
> As it exists today, say in India, while censorship is there, it
> exists only as hod-podge. Different ISP's censor different things. So
> let's say if I want to visit kat.cr (a torrrent site) if one ISP
> doesn't work, I can use another and get my thing done. But with this
> move, the possibility might be that all ISP's would have to bow down
> to powerful interests. Only few people who use and understand tor
> would be able to get away with seeing and using stuff which otherwise
> would have error 404 or Department of Telecommunications notice as the
> site resolves via BSNL.
> And while KAT maybe a bad example, it could also be parts of Wikipedia
> , pages/links which may have controversial content - for example both
> race and abortion are some of the hot topics for some people in the
> U.S. whereas Dalit and Kashmir are sensitive topics in India today.
> What are people's thoughts on this, too much ado abot nothing or do
> people think there is something to worry about ?
> In someways it is very similar to the net neutrality debate which
> happened due to Facebook Free Basics but much more insidious as
> governments can be as opaque as a private company if it wants to.
> Look forward to comments.
Just found this which seems to reinforce my fear -
Shirish Agarwal शिरीष अग्रवाल
My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A 2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8