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.
2015 will see the arrival of a new ITU treaty that will replace the current (outdated) treaty that was put into place way back in 1988. This comes as a setback for the U.N as the countries that refused to sign are amongst the largest telecommunications powers on the planet.
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 ITU has come under fire from certain corners - in particular the E.U. and Google - forcing the UN to deny that the purpose of the treaty was to take control of the internet. But the treaty responded by claiming that the treaty would enable member countries to hold equal rights over the internet's governing.
One of the talking points of the 23 page document was on the topic of spam which stated that: "Member States should endeavour to take necessary measures to prevent the propagation of unsolicited bulk electronic communications and minimize its impact on international telecommunications services."
It would seem that this rather vague description can be interpreted a number of ways, and in particular the use of the word 'unsolicited' raises a number of concerns. The main concern being that, in the eyes of the US constitution, it violates the first amendment, prohibiting any restrictions to the right of free 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.
A further 2 conferences are to be held in 2013, either one of which could see changes made to the treaty that would cause the 55 countries that did not sign to change their minds. Whether or not this comes to pass we can only wait and see. But, for now at least, common sense prevails.
2015 will see the arrival of a new ITU treaty that will replace the current (outdated) treaty that was put into place way back in 1988. This comes as a setback for the U.N as the countries that refused to sign are amongst the largest telecommunications powers on the planet.
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 ITU has come under fire from certain corners - in particular the E.U. and Google - forcing the UN to deny that the purpose of the treaty was to take control of the internet. But the treaty responded by claiming that the treaty would enable member countries to hold equal rights over the internet's governing.
One of the talking points of the 23 page document was on the topic of spam which stated that: "Member States should endeavour to take necessary measures to prevent the propagation of unsolicited bulk electronic communications and minimize its impact on international telecommunications services."
It would seem that this rather vague description can be interpreted a number of ways, and in particular the use of the word 'unsolicited' raises a number of concerns. The main concern being that, in the eyes of the US constitution, it violates the first amendment, prohibiting any restrictions to the right of free 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.
A further 2 conferences are to be held in 2013, either one of which could see changes made to the treaty that would cause the 55 countries that did not sign to change their minds. Whether or not this comes to pass we can only wait and see. But, for now at least, common sense prevails.
