Moving Net Control From ICANN to Governments? 468
a whoabot writes "The BBC has a piece by Bill Thompson suggesting that "control" of the internet should move away from corporate groups(ICANN and the Web Consortium) and to governments. We previously had an article on ICANN and the UN World Summit on the Information Society. One quote: "We allow images of consensual sex in our cinemas, but not images of bestiality or child abuse. Why should the net be any different?" My personal answer: because the internet should not be another TV or cinema, it should be a free, user-as-peer and user-controllable media; a "reversible" media, as Baudrillard would put it; not user-as-consumer."
Give control to Switzerland (Score:5, Funny)
Bestiality is cruelty to animals (Score:4, Funny)
Jesus Christ people, if you hang your free speech arguments on the right to show videos of daddy fucking a dog, you will lose those rights.
Re:adam smith (Score:2, Funny)
Duh! They have, its called the Internet.
Re:MOD PARENT wayyyyyy UP (Score:1, Funny)
want 2 cyber????
Re:FAILURE BOY SEZ: (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Silence the critics! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:No, because... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:government control (Score:2, Funny)
Result: the MTU will increase from 1460 bytes to 1.46 GB, and the quickest way of reading a foreign website will be air travel.
Re:Sealand is weak (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Use a little common sense (and Google). (Score:3, Funny)
Is it any wonder that Slashdot's bid for the ICANN contract was rejected?