Although most of you would (i imagine) have been completely unaware of it, the International Telecommunications World conference has recently taken place in Dubai, the repercussions of which could affect all internet users across the globe.
The current ITU treaty was established and put into place over 20 years ago in 1988, but will expire in 2015. the conference was intended for all leading nations to agree on a framework which would lay the foundations for a new treaty to be created.
The U.N were forced to deny allegations made by The E.U and Google accusing them of using the treaty as a way to effectively gain control over the internet. Although It would appear that an agreement is a long way off, 89 nations did sign the treaty, with a further 12 including Italy, Portugal, Sweden and the Czech Republic reserving the right to defer signing until a later date.
The new treaty is intended to replace the current one which was created in 1988 - before the internet even existed. But the United Nations have been heavily criticised from some corners - and in particular by the EU and Google - for using the treaty as a means of gaining control over the internet and online world.
But this announcement by the UN simply led many to claim that the treaty would simply enable much tighter restrictions to be introduced in the future, resulting in the UN gaining complete control of the internet and online world. Conspiracy or shrewd deduction, you decide.
The keyword here is "unsolicited". It is impossible to determine the content of a message without reading through it first, and therefore impossible to determine if said message was asked for or not. This would allow for any message sent to be read without any form of consent. The U.S said this violated the first amendment, which prohibits any laws that curtail freedom of speech.
The US ambassador clarified the position of the United States in a statement which explained that it would not be possible for the US to sign the treaty in its current form. They did not, however, rule out the possibility of them signing in the future if certain elements were amended.
But nothing has been decided yet, as there are a further two conferences scheduled for 2013, at either of which changes to the treaty could be made to sway some of the 55 nations who, as yet, have refused to sign. But whatever may or may not happen, lets just hope that all countries keep the privacy of their citizens as their number one priority and not factors such as profit or control.
The current ITU treaty was established and put into place over 20 years ago in 1988, but will expire in 2015. the conference was intended for all leading nations to agree on a framework which would lay the foundations for a new treaty to be created.
The U.N were forced to deny allegations made by The E.U and Google accusing them of using the treaty as a way to effectively gain control over the internet. Although It would appear that an agreement is a long way off, 89 nations did sign the treaty, with a further 12 including Italy, Portugal, Sweden and the Czech Republic reserving the right to defer signing until a later date.
The new treaty is intended to replace the current one which was created in 1988 - before the internet even existed. But the United Nations have been heavily criticised from some corners - and in particular by the EU and Google - for using the treaty as a means of gaining control over the internet and online world.
But this announcement by the UN simply led many to claim that the treaty would simply enable much tighter restrictions to be introduced in the future, resulting in the UN gaining complete control of the internet and online world. Conspiracy or shrewd deduction, you decide.
The keyword here is "unsolicited". It is impossible to determine the content of a message without reading through it first, and therefore impossible to determine if said message was asked for or not. This would allow for any message sent to be read without any form of consent. The U.S said this violated the first amendment, which prohibits any laws that curtail freedom of speech.
The US ambassador clarified the position of the United States in a statement which explained that it would not be possible for the US to sign the treaty in its current form. They did not, however, rule out the possibility of them signing in the future if certain elements were amended.
But nothing has been decided yet, as there are a further two conferences scheduled for 2013, at either of which changes to the treaty could be made to sway some of the 55 nations who, as yet, have refused to sign. But whatever may or may not happen, lets just hope that all countries keep the privacy of their citizens as their number one priority and not factors such as profit or control.
About the Author:
Saul Saresi writes regularly about latest Voip news and practices hosted business voip For more information about Voip services please visit his site Voipdito business phone line
No comments:
Post a Comment