Who is the world's main Internet provider? Who is its “owner”? Who owns Russian retail chains? Who owns the Internet in the world?

The George W. Bush administration has taken an unusual step in which officials hope to appear loyal to the administration of the Internet's domain system. In its "Sources Sought Notice," the US Department of Commerce is asking "prospective respondents" to compete for the IP Address and Domain Name Authority (IANA) contract. This contract provides for the management of the main database of domain files (Internet directory), such as .com, .net, .ru, .uk, .de and others. Since 1998, these functions have been performed by the non-profit organization ICANN. Top officials of US departments have repeatedly stated that changes in the domain management system are not expected, and against this background the announced competition looks strange.

The Domain Name System (DNS) was proposed by Jon Postel and Paul Mockapetris in 1982 to name hosts (computers or other equipment) connected to a network. The idea is based on hierarchy: each user belongs to a segment, the administration and technical support of which is carried out from the root, which is the domain of the first level of the hierarchy. In the case of the World Wide Web, these are international domains (Generic Top Level Domain - gTLD) and national domains (country code Top Level Domain - ccTLD).

One of the main issues was the distribution of domain names among interested parties. At first, distribution took place on an application basis, centrally and free of charge. However, with the growing availability of the Internet, a specific market for services has emerged in this area. In 1995, the US Nation Scientific Foundation (NSF), effectively a government agency, authorized Network Solution Inc. (NSI) register new domain names for money. NSF, NSI, and the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) effectively became the “masters of the Internet”: NSF provided funding for all work related to the support and development of the Internet, and NSI became a monopolist in the domain name market. This is not surprising, since the modern WWW actually grew out of NSFnet, a group of networks that provide Science Foundation scientists with access to supercomputer centers.

By 1998, the explosive growth of the Internet caused the industry to diversify. On January 30, the US government proposed a new scheme for exploiting domain names, known as the Green Paper. From this point on, the domain management business is divided into registry companies and registrar companies.

On November 25, 1998, an agreement (Memorandum of Understanding, MoU) was signed between the US Department of Commerce and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a corporation specially created to administer the Internet, which now plays the role of a regulator of the rules of the game in the domain market.

Registration includes organizational issues of managing the domain name space and is controlled by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), which manages the unified registry. Before the 1998 reform, this organization had the status of a research project at ISI (The Institute of Scientific Information) USC (The University of Southern California), and after that it became part of ICANN.

On April 25, 1999, ICANN announced a list of 34 companies that had announced their intention to become registrars, and on June 7, 1999, independent registrar Register.com Inc. announced that it registered its first domain using the distributed registration system VeriSign (a registry company spun out of NSI's business). This is how the first distributed registration system started working. Currently, VeriSign is the administrator of the COM and NET domains, and ICANN's role is to set the rules for domain sales. For example, according to the latest agreement for 2006-2009, VeriSign can raise prices for COM domains by no more than 7% per year and only in agreement with ICANN. At the same time, VeriSign annually pays ICANN a set amount, which increases from $6 million in 2006 to $12 million in 2009.

ICANN is responsible for managing the address space and allocating IP addresses to all interested parties. For this purpose, on October 19, 1999, ASO (Address Supporting Organization) was created within ICANN. At the same time, an agreement was concluded between ASO and three regional Internet registries (RIR), non-profit organizations responsible for the distribution of domains in the states of the corresponding regions: ARIN in Central and North America, APNIC in the Pacific region, RIPE NCC in Europe. In 2002, LACNIC (Latin America) joined this agreement, and in 2005, AfriNIC (Africa).

Before the November 2005 summit in Tunisia, dedicated to the problems of informatization of the world community, UN member countries negotiated on the problem of control over the Internet. Russia, China, Brazil, South Africa, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Norway, Switzerland and a number of other countries advocated transferring domain space management from ICANN to a special body at the UN, for example, a commission at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). However, statements that the Internet will remain in the hands of Americans were consistently made by a number of leaders of a number of US government agencies, and in October this point of view was confirmed by Congress in its resolution. As a result, on the eve of the opening of the summit, it was decided that the issue of control over the Internet would not be considered at all. However, representatives of the American delegation agreed to the creation of a national Internet Governance Forum, the decisions of which would not be binding. The founding meeting at the UN on the creation of this organization will be held on February 16-17. It should be noted that the idea is not innovative: in 2003, at the Geneva round of the World Summit on the Information Society, a working group on Internet governance was created, which, in particular, prepared materials on the e-government project for the summit in Tunis.

In view of the inflexibility of the US position, the competition for the role of Internet administrator announced by the Department of Commerce looks strange. Most likely, this was done to relieve tension around this topic, and based on the results of the competition, ICANN will confirm its authority.

What are the domains?

All top-level domains can be divided into two categories: generic domains (Generic TLDs, gTLDs), such as COM, NET, ORG, BIZ, etc., and national domains. Registration of second-level domains in generic domains is carried out by registrar organizations accredited by ICANN, they also determine the administration policy within the framework of the rules of the game set by ICANN. Country code names have been approved by the IANA organization in accordance with the international standard ISO 3166 adopted by this organization; this is about 250 names.

Initially, seven gTLDs were created (COM, NET, ORG, INT, EDU, GOV, MIL). Then, in 1984, in the documents adopted when approving these domains, it was written that such a number of them “will be sufficient, and the emergence of new domains is unlikely.” However, the growth of the Internet has exceeded expectations, and the global Internet community's need for more domains has increased. Since 2001, new gTLDs have been gradually introduced: INFO, BIZ, NAME, MUSEUM, COOP, AERO, TRAVEL, JOB, MOBI.

The most popular domains were COM, ORG and NET. Initially, the COM domain was intended for commercial organizations, the ORG domain for non-profit organizations, and the NET domain for everyone involved in the development of networks and telecommunications technologies. However, over time, domain registration in these zones has become completely free, and anyone can register a domain in them. The generic COM and NET domains are administered by VeriSign, and the ORG domain has been managed by the non-profit organization PIR since early 2003.

The INFO domain is designed for anyone who wants to post any information on the Internet. Its maintenance is entrusted to Afilias LLC. The BIZ domain is one of the new generic top-level domains intended for commercial organizations. Its launch gave companies additional options for hosting information compared to using the overloaded COM domain.

In contrast to these domains, the domains AERO, MUSIUM, TRAVEL, JOB, MOBI are intended for organizations with a special status, respectively, engaged in air transport, museums, tourism services, recruitment agencies, mobile operators. The PRO domain is intended for specialists (accountants, lawyers, doctors); The COOP domain is used by cooperatives.

Among general domains, there are also limited-use domains. They appeared in 1984 and immediately became “special”. This is an INT domain created for international organizations and controlled directly by IANA, which processes registration in the domain subject to specific requirements by the applicant organization. The EDU, GOV and MIL domains are controlled by the US government. The first is intended for free registration of US educational institutions and is administered by the non-profit association Educause. The GOV domain is created exclusively for US federal government agencies, and the registration of domain names in this domain is handled by the Government-Wide Registration Service. The MIL domain is under the control of the American government, in particular the US Department of State Security. Specialists of this particular Department maintain a database of domain names for the MIL domain, intended only for military organizations and institutions responsible for the country's security.

Situation in Russia

In September 2005, the Internet community celebrated the 15th anniversary of the SU domain, which became the forerunner of the Runet. The first domestic network project was created by physicists and programmers from the Institute of Atomic Energy named after. I.V. Kurchatova. And on September 19, 1990, the Association of UNIX Users (SUUG - Soviet UNIX User's Group) registered the SU top-level domain for use in the USSR. It also performed the functions of administering the domain until they were transferred to the Russian Research Institute for the Development of Public Networks (RosNIIROS), which In 1994, the registration of second-level domains in the SU zone ceased due to the emergence of the RU domain. However, the SU domain zone continued to grow spontaneously due to an increase in the number of third-level domains. In June 2003, the Internet Development Fund, which is currently entrusted with functions. administrator of the SU domain, free registration of second-level domains in the SU zone was again opened. The anniversary scientific and practical conference “Internet and Science: 15 Years of Journey”, held in November 2005, was dedicated to the fifteenth anniversary of the SU domain.

Russia belongs to the European region, and the RIPE NCC is responsible for the distribution of DNS addresses among Russian users in the face of ASO. Distribution occurs through provider organizations that become members of the RIPE NCC and receive Local Internet Registry (LIR) status.

In 1992, the IANA allocated country codes according to the ISO 3166-1 two-letter code. At that time, IANA received many applications for the administration of the RU domain from different companies. However, one organization must have the right of administration in the face of IANA, and IANA policy provides for its complete non-interference in internal conflicts of this kind. To solve this problem, a meeting of the largest Russian Internet providers was established, which was held on December 4, 1993 and ended with the signing of the Agreement “On the procedure for administering the zone.RU”. The RU domain officially appeared on April 7, 1994, and its administration and technical support of the RU domain was entrusted to RosNIIROS.

To develop a policy for registering domain names in the .RU domain, a Coordination Group was created, which included 28 representatives of telecommunications companies and scientific networks. In 2001, the representation system was improved: three public organizations, the Regional Public Center for Internet Technologies (ROCIT), the Union of Internet Operators (SOI), the Association of Documentary Telecommunications (ADE), representing the interests of Internet users, communication service operators, government bodies and entrepreneurs , established the Coordination Center for the national domain.RU of the Internet. Continuity was maintained: NIIROS became one of the founders of the Center, and the Coordination Group of the National Domain was transformed into Committee No. 1 of the Center. In 2002, the Coordination Center was given powers to develop rules for registering domain names in the RU domain, accreditation of registrars and developing promising projects related to the development of the Russian national domain.

At the same time, a distribution registration system also appeared in Russia. In 2000, RosNIIROS separated the Regional Network Information Center (RU-CENTER) from its structure and transferred to it the functions of registering second-level domains in the RU domain; subsequently other registrars appeared. And from January 1, 2005, the Russian Research Institute for the Development of Public Networks ceased to independently perform the functions of a second-level domain registrar in the RU domain. Now RosNIIROS performs the functions of technical support for the registration system and DNS servers of the RU domain, and also carries out registration and technical support of generic domains (GEOGRAPHICAL, GENERIC) and third-level domains in the generic domains ORG.RU, NET.RU, PP. RU, COM.RU. On January 4, 2006, the Coordination Center for the National Internet Domain became the official administrator of the .RU domain.

With the growing popularity of the Internet in Russia, the system of distribution and maintenance of national domain domains is diversifying by dividing functions between registrar companies that sell domain names and public non-profit organizations that work on the basis of the principle of collegiality and perform control functions.

Internet. We all use it - now it has become an integral part of our lives. However, almost none of us know what it is and how it came into being, and most importantly, who owns it. Usually, if you ask a person: “who owns the Internet?” he replies "that it is a network of computers that cannot belong to anyone....etc." He's partly right. But the Internet is far from just a network of computers. Let's try to figure it out.

For a long time, legislators avoided the word “Internet” in every possible way.. What can I say, in part four of the Civil Code, instead of writing “use is posting on the Internet,” the legislator wrote: “use is making available to the public in such a way that any person can access the work from anywhere and at any time by one's own choice" - in terms of meaning, nothing comes to mind other than "posting on the Internet", but for some reason, even in 2007, they decided to avoid this word.

However, in recent times, the state and government agencies have become a little less afraid of the Internet. If previously, when hearing the word “Internet,” any official would be “stuck” for 10 minutes and did not know what to do next, but in recent years, the author of this post even several times based his position in court on printouts of websites. These are positive changes, however, until now, the term “Internet” has not been defined at the legislative level (if anyone comes across a definition of the Internet in legislation, do not be lazy and write to me about it - I will be very grateful).

Thus, the Internet seems to exist, and some government agencies. authorities even oblige them to publish certain information there, but the legislator has not yet decided what the Internet is. There are some definitions in American law, but I don’t want to go that far, because American laws do not apply on the territory of the Russian Federation.

The main idea that most Internet users share is that there is complete anonymity and a complete lack of control. And most importantly, there is no way to control who wrote what when. And the main point of this series of articles is to try to figure out who owns the Internet, whether there really is complete anonymity, who owns the domains and what they are, and what laws apply on the Internet.

Let's first find out what it means to be connected to the Internet.

One of the principles of the Internet is that each device connected to it has a unique digital address (IP address). Since each computer device connected to the network has its own unique(!) address, it is clear that these numbers are not generated randomly through a number generator. This means that someone somehow assigns these addresses to all devices. Thus, if we find out who distributes IP addresses and on what basis, then we will understand who is the key figure on the Internet. After all, since he gives out addresses, it means that he may simply not give out the address to someone and that means limiting his access to the network.

Who assigns you an IP address?"Provider!" - almost any experienced user will answer - and he will be partly right. Indeed, most IP addresses are assigned by the provider. This happens either at the time of concluding an agreement (often the address itself is an appendix to the agreement) - then the IP address will be permanent, or every time you connect to the network, the provider will issue a new IP address, which will be “yours” as long as you don't decide to disconnect. The main trick is that the provider cannot give out any IP address.

The IP address looks like this: xxx .xxx .xxx .xx - 11 digits. However, your provider only assigns the last digits. Conventionally, Beeline owns IP addresses of the following type 100.xxx .xxx .xx, and MTS 101.xxx.xxx.xx. Let me make a reservation right away that this is an example with abstract providers and numbers, and in life everything looks much more complicated, there are many levels and so on, but for ease of understanding we will use this example.

Thus, the full IP address is assigned to you by either MTS (then it will start with 101) or Beeline (then it will start with 100). But, every time you log in through MTS, your address will always be 101.xxx .xxx .xx. Thus, MTS owns all addresses starting with 101. About the same as the Moscow code begins with 495. And now the main question is who gave MTS the right to dispose of addresses on 101. Who assigned such addresses to this provider. With telephones everything is simple - this is done at the state level. To call Russia, you must first dial +7 - that is, get to Russia (as all countries agreed), and then dial the city code (as the state itself ordered), then the subscriber code (as the city's PBX ordered). In the case of a telephone, the hierarchy is immediately visible. But what about the network? Who assigns the most important numbers?

The main organization for registration (i.e. assignment) of IP addresses is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers - ICANN. This not-for-profit corporation was created by the US Department of Commerce and registered under the laws of California. ICANN itself actively attracts legal entities from different countries to its activities and has a very complex and extensive system (for the curious, here is their website - www.icann.org). Currently, they are trying to show that they are an international non-governmental organization, although, according to documents, they are still under the control of the American authorities.

So at the top of the IP address distribution is ICANN, then national Internet registrars (according to the possibly outdated information I have, there are only 4 of them), then local Internet registrars and finally providers who already distribute addresses among their clients.

So what do we end up with? IP addresses are unique, they are never repeated (similar to telephone numbers); without an IP address, access to the Internet is not possible. As a result, the pinnacle of IP address distribution is the American company ICANN, which, of course, can easily cut off almost any piece of the Internet.

Abstract example. ICANN gets together and decides that it is impossible to say “Schwarzneger is a fool” and tells the main registrars that anyone who says that will simply be turned off. What do registrars do, they tell those below them in the hierarchy about this, and so the matter comes to providers (who are small things in this link). What providers do is stipulate in every contract that using the phrase “Schwargneger is a fool” online will result in immediate disconnection. The second question is that so far (as far as I know) ICANN has not taken a single step to restrict anything on the network, besides, you can’t catch everyone who says Schwarzenegger is a fool (although it won’t be very difficult for a provider to do this). However, the fact remains that theoretically such a situation is possible.

I hope there will be a continuation of the article soon, and this continuation will be entirely devoted to domain names.

I will be happy to listen to any feedback about this article, argue, listen to another point of view, hear about factual errors and inaccuracies in the article, and try to answer all questions. I think that the topic is very interesting and little studied, so reposting is welcome;)

The answer to this question is both yes and no. Technically, this is an articulation of network elements, but in fact it is a separate world and an instrument of influence, without which it is impossible to live and work normally today. At least in developed and developing countries. It is best to think of Internet governance as the collective writing of the “rules of the game.”

Then in the future (though not as soon as we would like) the system will look like this:

• independent technology regulator (now ICANN and its ilk), which is self-funded by providing certain services, for example, charging fees for the distribution of domain names. Also at the technological level, IP addresses are distributed, data transfer protocols are defined;
• the most important element that is now completely missing is some kind of analogue of a unified legislative power at the global level. Now the development of requirements and restrictions is happening from the bottom up - each government acts as strictly as it sees fit, the interests of other players are not taken into account.

Basically we are talking about restrictions in terms of content and resource blocking. A recent example is that in Thailand, making an offensive statement against the ruling royal family is considered a criminal offense (they give 15 years for such an action). Over the past couple of months, players such as Facebook and YouTube, at the request of the country's authorities, have blocked more than 3 thousand pages with statements of this kind. The most interesting thing is this: now the blocking is happening at the country level, but the Thai authorities have begun blackmail - if all such pages are not blocked, then companies will not be allowed to conduct commercial activities in the national Internet segment of the country. Imagine if each country has its own law prohibiting insults to anyone (the authorities will, of course, specify the untouchables)? By the way, there is no news yet about the corresponding actions of social networks. Cleaning is carried out at the level of local providers. Besides, what is even considered an insult?

So interaction and the development of common criteria are absolutely necessary. If we evaluate the current laws, then we can consider them to be the most adequate so far (now most countries do not hesitate and block by IP address), and the reasons for blocking correspond to the articles of almost all criminal codes for many years - drugs, child pornography, terrorism and other horrors.

Moreover, restrictions must be assigned taking into account the interests of all “residents” of the Network, that is, the civil and business community must also have the right to vote. Actually, now.

Yuriy Kargapolov, member of the Coordination Council of the Ukrainian Network Information Center, which administers the Cyrillic domain zone. UKR.

The Internet does not belong to anyone. The Internet should not belong to anyone. If we consider the version according to which the Internet belongs to the Americans, then it must be stated that Americans do not consider themselves the rulers of the Internet, at least their internet-community, but their political “wants” are another matter.

The Internet does not belong to anyone.

From a technical point of view, today the technical policies of Internet governance are in no way dependent on any entity related to the Internet. But from an administrative point of view, not everything is so simple and unambiguous. For example, theoretically, the State Department has influence on decision-making on the functioning of the network. But this is only theoretical. If this theory is translated into practice, then a huge piece will be broken off from the moral weight of America as such. But, let’s put it this way: “disabling” the Internet in a certain territory, defined by the borders of a state, depends on many factors. There is, of course, the State Department factor. But if the policies for passing and routing Internet traffic are in hands that may be influenced by government structures, then in the case of particularly “outstanding” situations, even the local government can limit access to the Internet for users of the country, although this will not be 100% filtering . The most advanced users will have access to external network resources.

Andrey Yarantsev, top manager of Wargaming

The Internet belongs to all humanity.

The Internet is a number of networks voluntarily connected to each other. This particular community of networks (in fact, the name Internet itself was born from here) does not belong to anyone, but there are a number of organizations that regulate the operation of certain services/network protocols. All these ICANN, ietf, w3c and so on. And there are government organizations (such as Roskomnadzor or the Great Firewall of China) that look after their regional segment of the Internet through telecoms.

In principle, I am happy with everything in the current situation (the Internet belongs to all of humanity), although, of course, the freedom of communication that existed in the 90s no longer exists. But any state will inevitably try to regulate/shape/firewall its networks, because this is part of state security.

Anatoly Streltsov, professor, deputy director of the Institute of Information Security Problems of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov

The Internet is a global commons.

It all depends on whose point of view this issue is being considered, and what is meant by the Internet. From the point of view of American specialists, it seems to me that the Internet is their invention, which was given to other countries to use. From my point of view, the Internet is a global property and does not belong to anyone in particular.

Kirill Voloshin, entrepreneur, co-owner of the portalTUT. BY

The Internet, like Antarctica, cannot belong to anyone.

In my opinion, the question is from the series, who owns the air or Antarctica? Yes, there are countries that play first fiddle in the processes of managing and developing the Network. There are those who fence off their segments from the rest of the world or filter part of the international web. But I peacefully believe that, like Antarctica, for which countries in the 20th century concluded an agreement to use it in the interests of all humanity, the Internet today cannot belong to anyone - neither corporations nor countries.

If we look from a technical, infrastructural point of view, I think it is correct to compare the Internet with highways - it connects different states, but a specific country is responsible for the serviceability of the “coverage” and “wires” on its territory for the general benefit.

The Internet does not belong to anyone. Even America.

I try to follow the process of transition of control from the US Department of Commerce to multi-stakeholders. So the Americans own (at the moment) the technical component of domain management. And that's formal. But for me this is not the Internet. The Internet does not belong to anyone.

Alexander Arsenov, Belarusian journalist

Judging by indirect signs, the Internet does not belong to anyone. Although there is no direct evidence of this and any Masonic conspiracy can be invented, there were many cases when the “owner of the Internet” had to take action. From the removal of a harmless photo of Barbra Streisand’s cottage to Navalny’s not so harmless investigations about the cottages of Putin’s entourage. From Assange and Snowden to pirated torrents or child porn. The more you demand that your bad photo be removed from the Internet, the more the Internet replicates it.

Judging by indirect signs, the Internet does not belong to anyone.

You could say that the Internet belongs to those who can turn it off. But the problem is that there is no universal “switch”, such is the structure of the Web. Unless individual states can turn off the Internet within their borders or not let in the “external” Internet. But so far only North Korea has done this - for other countries, whose citizens have already managed to “taste” it, it is too dangerous. More than once there have been cases when, during mass protests in cities and entire countries, the Internet was turned off, but the protests did not subside, but rather intensified. And the more civilized and peaceful the country, the greater the danger that hipsters will not like communicating in person and will start burning tires.

Even if you are not afraid of a boarding school riot, not all countries have a “switch.” Even if Trump comes to power in the United States and decides to shut down the Internet, too many companies provide Internet access. Some will drag out the process, others will not agree, and while the matter drags on, there will be angry hipsters with tires. Only countries like Belarus have a “switch”, where the external channel is controlled by three companies, 2.5 of which are state-owned. In Russia, they say, they tried their own “switch”, but it did not work due to the large number of small providers, legal and not very external channels.

Runet will not belong to Russia.

It is clearly not profitable for business to turn off the Internet. And giants like Google don’t have much power in it - Google doesn’t really get through the Great Firewall of China. But the Chinese Internet does not belong to China, but to the Chinese (potentially evil hipsters with tires) and Chinese companies (they will also be evil if they lose a significant part of their profits). And the Chinese break through the firewall if they want. Another thing is how much there is such desire.

Even if Russia builds its own firewall, it will not hide the cottages of Putin’s entourage from those who want to look at them, but will only reduce their number, increasing negative moods in society. Runet will not belong to Russia.

Alexander Ocheretny, journalist/editor

The Internet is an ocean, only an information one.

The Internet should not belong to anyone. This is an ocean, only informational. Like any ocean, there is everything here - harmful, useful, poisonous, colorful, sweet, and so on and so forth. The ocean belongs to no one and belongs to everyone. You can use it for free, or you can use it for money. You can do crawl, you can do breaststroke, you can do it on a yacht, you can do it on an aircraft carrier. You can simply enjoy the ocean, or you can extract money from it if you know how.

Maxim Maglyas, brand manager at Mail.ru Games

The Internet, as an infrastructure, belongs to a number of large corporations.

The Internet, as an infrastructure, belongs to a number of large corporations. Trunk lines, cables, hardware, that's all. Well, however, not just one, acting as a monopolist, but still several. However, if we consider the word belongs in the context of “who can destroy the Internet,” then these are precisely the very corporations that own the infrastructure.

If we consider the Internet as an ecosystem, then it essentially does not belong to anyone and everyone at once. Whoever is able to use this ecosystem here and now for their own purposes, be it Google or streamer Karina, owns the Internet. And it doesn’t matter whether the count is for hours or for many years. This is just a platform with its own rules of the game, and constantly changing ones. The one who is able to comply with them or foresee their changes (or act as a lever for their changes) is, in fact, the current master of the situation.

“The EU says the Internet will collapse unless the US hands over control of it to the UN. The Internet is managed by the Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), under a contract with the US Department of Commerce,” writes the Guardian newspaper. The EU threatens: if the United States does not give in, then China, Russia, Brazil and Arab countries will launch their own Internet. This is supported by Saudi Arabia and Iran. But the joy is premature, the United States is not going to give the Internet to anyone, especially despots and terrorists, to enslave the entire planet. Information and transactions made on the Internet make America the central banker of earth's information. In addition, these countries can only launch their Internet at home. Access to the global network is impossible without ICANN, which is controlled by America.

At a conference in Tunis in 2003, the UN failed to wrest control of the Internet from the United States, although Annan, forgiven by America for deception and bribes, said in Tunis that despite the failure of the UN attempts, “the discussion will continue. We will support her in any way we can.” There is no doubt about it: even Tunisia, where journalists are arrested and the press and Internet are censored, would like to take control of the virtual space. The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), with the participation of 175 countries, met in November 2005. They adopted a Declaration of Principles and an Action Plan for the Attack on America. The WSIS website is filled with survey forms, a library of photographs, and the outpourings of the Preparatory Committee, which calls itself, Orwellian-style, Prepcom.

Long forgotten are those suffering under dictators and the victims of the ongoing massacre in Sudan. The UN spends 75% of its time issuing resolutions condemning Israel for any actions aimed at its self-defense. Not only that, the UN subsidized the production of posters, car stickers, mugs and T-shirts with the words “Today Gaza, tomorrow the West Bank and Jerusalem,” which were distributed to Arabs during the evacuation of Jews from Gaza. UN Special Envoy John Dugard, visiting Israel, wrote a report that “the creation of two states in Palestine seems very difficult, if not completely impossible, and discussions must begin on the creation of a binational Palestinian state.”

Taking over the Internet became Plan No. 1. In 1945, the mandate to create the UN came under the sign of peace, but over the past 60 years, the UN has become a bloc of dictators and terrorists with diplomatic privileges, rusted by corruption. Former New York City Mayor Ed Koch once called the UN a cesspool. In 1948, when 5 Arab dictators abandoned their armies to destroy Israel, the UN did not create any commissions of inquiry. Over the years, she has long proven that she stands on the side of the Arabs and is ready to do anything to destroy Israel. As many as 4 UN departments, 2 of which are under the control of the Annan secretariat, spend millions of dollars annually producing and disseminating propaganda questioning Israel's right to exist. The “Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Relating to the Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories” will “investigate the occupation” not only of the territories liberated by Israel in 1967, but also of lands within the 1967 borders recognized by the international community.

The UN seeks to transform itself into a world government by eliminating the sovereignty of all countries of the world through a network of negotiations, conferences and protocols, it is involved in everything from trade to the environment, and demands the right to taxation, its own legal system and a military machine. Designed to maintain peace and security, it is not only completely useless, but also threatens democracy and freedom throughout the world. And you need to fight the UN with information about it itself. The Internet is under threat, and we must protect this outpost of free speech and information sharing.

Last year, Republican Senator Norm Coleman proposed a resolution supporting the Bush administration, which rejects the UN's claims. Colman believes the resolution will protect the Internet from UN takeover. In a recent article on the subject, Coleman explains that “if we do not respond accordingly, the freedom and enterprise that has nurtured this information miracle will come to an end. By doing so, we will be sacrificing the access to information, privacy and intellectual property protection that we need.”

“This sounds like a plot from a Tom Clancy book. An anonymous group of international technocrats gathers in secret meetings in Geneva under the guise of developing a project to further develop a world that can more fully participate in the computing revolution. Their real goal is to develop a strategy to wrest the Internet out of American hands. This will allow the UN to politicalize the International Network and give it the opportunity to dominate the world... To those countries that are trying to block access to information and dialogue for their people, we must say, as Ronald Reagan said: “Tear down this wall!” Concessions will lead to defeat. We cannot allow Tunisia to become the Munich of information,” writes Norm Coleman.

The Internet, which we have been using for many years and which seems to belong to no one, turns out to be controlled from the very beginning by one organization - the US government. Not everyone likes this - the European Union continues its campaign to transfer the Internet into the hands of the UN.

Network monopoly
Passions around Internet control are heating up every day. The apogee of these disputes is scheduled for November 16-18, when the world summit on the information society will be held in Tunisia. At the summit, the European Union intends to raise the extremely painful topic for the United States of technical management of the global web.
The fact is that the Internet is now controlled by the formally private and non-profit organization ICANN, which is based in California. However, ICANN operates under a single and exclusive contract with the US Department of Commerce.
Previously, rapidly developing countries such as Brazil, India and China tried to challenge the American monopoly. Now the entire EU has joined them. Brussels' position is that the Internet must be governed by all stakeholders - governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations. An appropriate agreement on Internet governance should be developed within the UN.

Which “web” is more useful?
The UN, by the way, is not at all against such an idea. According to this organization, international management of the Network will bring a lot of benefits. For example, Internet providers located in developing countries will save money on interconnection fees, it will be easier to track cybercriminals, fight spam, and protect intellectual property rights.
In addition, thanks to UN control, it will be possible to establish uniform standards for consumers, for example, in the field of online shopping. Finally, the World Wide Web will finally be able to become multilingual - ICANN, either intentionally or due to lack of time, is slowing down this process, as a result of which both in distant China and in our Latvia, email addresses exist only in English.
Meanwhile, the United States is categorically against this idea. According to the American administration, the Internet should be regulated horizontally, that is, by private structures.

Confrontation

Dangerous monopoly

• Vivian Reding, EU Commissioner for the Information Society:
  - Many parts of the world are unhappy with the fact that only one country is associated with the institution that technically runs the Internet. The US is absolutely isolated, and it is dangerous. Imagine that the Brazilians or the Chinese began to create their own Internet. That would be the end of the story... Therefore, the EU's priorities are: increasing the internationalization of the governance of the underlying Internet resources, which will ensure that developing countries participate in this governance.

Power vertical

• David GROSS, Information Policy Coordinator, US State Department:
  - The EU proposal is a historic shift in Internet regulatory policy from one based on private sector initiatives to government-led, vertical control of the Internet. We think this is incorrect. The whole idea of ​​the Internet is that it is flexible and driven by the private sector.