It will be one of the main bones of contention this week as
government negotiators and non-governmental organisations descend on
Geneva for the final round of preparatory talks on the draft declaration
and plan of action due to be endorsed by heads of state and government
at the summit on December 10-12.
However, UN officials say they see no compromise emerging. They
expect governments to decide instead to continue talks on internet
governance with the aim of reaching accord by 2005, when the second
stage of the two-part summit is due to take place in Tunisia.
"They're no longer going to try to agree on this," a UN official said
last week.
Poorer nations such as Brazil, India, South Africa, China and Saudi
Arabia, as well as some richer ones, are growing dissatisfied with the
workings of California-based Icann (the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers), the semi-private internet address regulator
set up five years ago.
The critics argue that the internet is a public resource that should
be managed by national governments and, at an international level, by an
intergovernmental body such as the International Telecommunications
Union, the UN agency that is organising the information summit.
However, the US and the European Commission are staunchly defending
the Icann model, which is based on minimal regulation and commercial
principles. Icann members are predominantly drawn from industrialised
countries and the established internet community.
Defenders of the status quo say handing over power to governments
could threaten the untrammelled flow of information and ideas that many
see as the very essence of the borderless internet.
But these arguments appear to be losing force against the emergence
of new challenges such as unwanted advertising ("spam"), privacy and
security worries, hate speech and child pornography, which have
convinced many governments of the need for international regulation and
enforcement.
The question of internet governance, which erupted at a relatively
late stage in the preparatory summit negotiations, is just one of many
issues negotiators must try to resolve this week. Rich and poor
countries are also at odds over creation of a "digital solidarity fund"
that would finance investment to bridge the "digital divide" in access
to information and communications technologies.
Other unresolved disputes concern the balance between intellectual
property protection and access to information, the role of the media,
and acceptable boundaries to freedom of _expression_.