Brief the policy and tell what are the problems and gives few solutions for Broadband Telecommunication policy?
Some of the experts from the telecom industry look at Internet as a refractor of the expansion of the technical arrangement. Communication specialists strain the meaning of internal governance as assistance of communication. Human rights activists looks Internet Governance as a freedom of communication, confidentiality, and other simple human rights. After all the controversies over the meaning and use the meaning of the term “good governance” as stated by the World Bank as to encourage the reorganization of states by announcing more clearness, dropping exploitation, and growing the efficacy of management This topic also brought about the discussion over the necessity for government involvement- ‘Handing Control of the Internet Over to China The misguided freak out over ICANN’ ( Gelbstein E. & Kurbalija J., 2005).
Irrespective of whether anyone supports the given rule or regulation, it is known that regulation of internet is not an easy task. There are lot of violations which are being carried out against the property of internet in the form of copying music, any software or intellectual property. Mr. Johnson, Mr. Post and Mr. Perrit said that when there are many self-governing participants finishing manifold autonomous packets by means of manifold autonomous stations, there is no principal communiqué station which will be able to aid as a controller for spreading and implementing rules. Rules are creators on institutional issues. The Internet encounters recognized authorities.
There is need of governance as there is need for authority. There is need of governance for the purpose of framing the policy decisions. The decision may be in the form of imposing tax, fine, issuing of license or putting a compulsory rule. Governance is required as there is requirement for some instrument for putting sanctions. This would mean that anyone who goes against the framed laws shall be liable for punishment. Governance gives jurisdiction which means that it gives the authority the right to frame decisions which will be the base for application of law and enforced by means of sanctions.
These four factors helps in regulation. The reason that authority, law, sanctions, and jurisdictions are not in proper order it becomes difficult to regulate internet. ICANN is much aware of these four factors with the help of its Internet’s domain name system (DNS). Even though there is no common center point for the communication through internet, DNS gives centralized Internet addressing. DNS is also an indispensable source which gives a place for providing platform for sanctioning users. DNS also clearly defines jurisdictions on the Internet. DNS helps to map different zones and frame regulation. Looking at all these factors ICANN deals into internet governance which poses various concerns as to how ICANN shall govern internet (Klein H., 2002).
In 2014, the U.S. government made an announcement that it would pursue to surrender an honored part in the running of Internet names and numbers. This announcement was made by giving ICANN—the non-profit Internet Company for Allocated Names and Numbers to last working in the same manner as it does now without the need for any future contract with the Department of Commerce.
ICANN is an organization which assists in maintaining IP addresses in proper direction and way by making sure that each address used to make a party recognize is not given to someone else on the internet. It enables the accumulation of “top level domains,” those suffixes like .com, .org, .uk, .clothing, newrepublic.com . To this announcement Wall Street Journal has commented as America has surrendered internet. One member of Congress said that to give away the regulating system to ICANN will give the other countries like China and Russia, which do not offer the same importance to the right of speech to give their perspective as to how the internet appears and functions. A Daily Caller also remarked that the statement given by Obama is equal to the decision given by Carter where the Panama Canal was forgone. The only difference among the two is that the decision taken by Obama will have even worse consequences to be faced. and Newt Gingrich said that now every person residing in America should be concerned with Obama’s decision to give up the regulation of internet in the hands of some group which is not even properly defined which is highly risky. These people did not want the governance to come in the hands of one company. The people were asking internet governance to be in the hands of government. They were scared with the fact that if not governed properly it create trouble for everyone. (Zittrain J., 2014).
ICANN has come forward with as removing with the myth that internet disorder cannot be controlled. DNS works on the top-down control mechanism which helps ICANN to frame policies. The effect this shall have on the future will only be revealed once the results are out and hence time will only speak about it. ICANN looks at three ways in which know-how forms the social order. First, neutral topographies of the technology designed the organizational and governing system. The methodical features of a disseminated database forms significant policy factors. Any effort to alter ICANN’s position as regulator would mean to reform the fundamental technology. The second way that technology formed the social order was the part of engineers in creating policy. The choice of country codes as domain names was a historic judgment with deep policy concerns. This choice came at such an early stage in the internet growth procedure that the one who were working on it were the research engineers. They were certain that Internet domains should be related with geopolitical entities. They concluded to form the Internet like national PTTs. This could be thought by the engineers because they were controlling the process from the early stage of development. The last and the third way that technology has its effect on the social order is that it delivers legality for cautious framing of conclusions. When there are certain decisions over policies which are put under the heading of being technical then it is better to get them discussed and governed behind closed door with the experienced and knowledge people. Despite critics ICANN advocated that they were making impartial selections on the base of methodological knowledge.
ICANN influences regulation of Internet to understand worldwide public policy. The regulatory charter for the worldwide data arrangement of the succeeding century has been generated.
Gelbstein E &Kurbalija J., (2005), Knowledge of development series-internet governance issues, actors and divides, Published by Diplo Foundation and Global Knowledge Partnership.
Zittrain J., (2014), No, Barack Obama Isn’t handling control of the internet over China, https://www.newrepublic.com/article/117093/us-withdraws-icann-why-its-no-big-deal.
Klein H., (2002), ICANN and Internet Governance: Leveraging Technical Coordination to Realize Global Public Policy, Taylor & Francis, USA.