New telecommunications agreement signed in Dubai led to a split in ITU
Today ended the conference of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), held from 3 to 14 December in Dubai. 89 participating countries signed a new edition of the telecommunications agreement, which was last updated in 1988. 55 countries, including the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and others refused to sign the contract. The head of the US delegation left the conference room at the time of signing. Despite the fact that the most odious proposals, which directly and unambiguously lead to the legitimization of censorship on the Internet, have not passed, the new agreement contains several provisions that allow state control over the Network.
In particular, Article 5B states: "The countries parties to the treaty should try to take the necessary measures to prevent the spread of unwanted mass electronic communications and minimize their impact on international telecommunication services." Although advocates of the new version of the treaty say that we are talking only about spam, representatives of the United States and other countries that refused to sign the agreement insist that repressive regimes will be able to interpret it much more widely, using censorship to justify it.
The discussion of the new treaty came to a standstill on December 13, when, contrary to statements made earlier that the new version of the agreement would be created only as a result of a consensus of the overwhelming majority of participants, the final version was adopted by vote, by a simple majority. After that, the United States and about twenty other countries stated that they would not sign the contract.
The new contract will come into force in January 2015. Countries that have not signed the new version of the treaty will continue to be guided by the Melbourne Treaty of 24 years ago, in which there is not even a hint of the Internet. While it is difficult to say what this will lead to in the future. New formulations are too vague and only open up the potential for bureaucratic control over the Internet. In the worst case, if the countries interested in controlling the Internet can develop even a small but important success achieved at a conference in Dubai, not only ITU, but also a worldwide network may be under threat of a split.
')
The possibility of introducing state control over the Internet has caused a storm of indignation in the network. Google conducted a massive collection of signatures in defense of Internet freedom, the European Parliament, at the suggestion of the Pirate Party, recommended that delegates from European countries not sign a new treaty, the US Congress unanimously adopted a resolution in defense of the Internet free from state control. Against innovations , the “father of the Internet” Vint Surf also spoke out .
Sources: BBC , MSN news .
UPD: Here is the final text of the agreements in Russian and a list of countries that have signed and not signed the agreement. Thank you DimaZZ .
In particular, Article 5B states: "The countries parties to the treaty should try to take the necessary measures to prevent the spread of unwanted mass electronic communications and minimize their impact on international telecommunication services." Although advocates of the new version of the treaty say that we are talking only about spam, representatives of the United States and other countries that refused to sign the agreement insist that repressive regimes will be able to interpret it much more widely, using censorship to justify it.
The discussion of the new treaty came to a standstill on December 13, when, contrary to statements made earlier that the new version of the agreement would be created only as a result of a consensus of the overwhelming majority of participants, the final version was adopted by vote, by a simple majority. After that, the United States and about twenty other countries stated that they would not sign the contract.
The new contract will come into force in January 2015. Countries that have not signed the new version of the treaty will continue to be guided by the Melbourne Treaty of 24 years ago, in which there is not even a hint of the Internet. While it is difficult to say what this will lead to in the future. New formulations are too vague and only open up the potential for bureaucratic control over the Internet. In the worst case, if the countries interested in controlling the Internet can develop even a small but important success achieved at a conference in Dubai, not only ITU, but also a worldwide network may be under threat of a split.
')
The possibility of introducing state control over the Internet has caused a storm of indignation in the network. Google conducted a massive collection of signatures in defense of Internet freedom, the European Parliament, at the suggestion of the Pirate Party, recommended that delegates from European countries not sign a new treaty, the US Congress unanimously adopted a resolution in defense of the Internet free from state control. Against innovations , the “father of the Internet” Vint Surf also spoke out .
Sources: BBC , MSN news .
UPD: Here is the final text of the agreements in Russian and a list of countries that have signed and not signed the agreement. Thank you DimaZZ .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/162647/
All Articles