btw, the itu imploded

Nick Hilliard nick at foobar.org
Fri Dec 14 20:32:02 UTC 2012


On 14/12/2012 19:51, Mike A wrote:
> Yep. _Gloriously_! The US walked out, followed by bunchty others. 
> 
> <http://www.pcworld.com/article/2020469/opponents-say-itu-treaty-threatens-internet-freedom.html>

The ITU didn't implode and that article gives a ridiculously misleading
impression of what happened.  The BBC gives a more balanced viewpoint:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20717774

There's some stuff up on some US news channels (ABC, etc), but some of the
larger players (CNN, NY Times + others) haven't actually woken up to the
extent of this tech/political landgrab, and have no recent articles on the
outcome or the political importance of it.

What actually happened is that the ITU ignored their previous promises not
to have a vote on the ITRs.  When a vote was finally called because it was
apparently that there was no general consensus on the articles, 77
countries voted in favour and 33 voted against, causing the treaty to start
the process of becoming legally binding in those countries which voted in
favour.

The current positions are here:

http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/S12-WCIT12-C-0066!!MSW-E.pdf
http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/S12-WCIT12-C-0067!!MSW-E.pdf

Many countries are formally sitting on the fence, including pretty much
every country in Europe which didn't walk out - also enjoy the spat in
declarations #4 (argentina) and #93 (UK).

Now that this landgrab has succeeded in large chunks of the world, the
ITU's position has consolidated, although not nearly to the extent that had
originally been envisaged in the draft ITRs.  I don't forsee this debate
dying any time soon.

Nick




More information about the NANOG mailing list