currently, the USA is holding almost all the cards of internet through ICANN as you know. I guess other nations are not happy about this as internet become so important it's like something belong to every body being guided unilaterally by the US policies and be subject to it's doctrine which probably doesn't always represent all. that just throw to the wall others digital existence; diversities, equal participation ,equal opportunities ...etc who do you think should control internet?
No one should 'control' the internet. Basicly, there should be no 'you can't do this, you can only do this' stuff. Anything goes.
not that far ....I think you don't like the word "control" lets say who is the best captain for the internet ship to get the best direction you know what I mean ?
The internet doesn't need a controller nor does it need a captain. It is the best example of a free market enterprise. Whatever the market demands, the internet comes up with that and starts moving in that direction.
Every country should has their own captain and has the right to control it. Internet is used world wide. It does not represent USA, Europe, African or Asian.
Nobody should control it. But each country should have their own domain company that allows you buy domains for cheap.
Any country that is the home to the infrastructure controls the internet. The safest bet would be China.
We webmasters control it really, besides big-name sites like Yahoo, Google, YouTube, and the like, and that's how it should remain. They control everything their people see, right? Then the internet would be filled with pages and pages that say how great the Chinese government is? I don't think so.
Hi ... here's an analogously article related to this thread. Think as you read and don't expect literal equivalence. Click here for article.
it's not only about domains it's about using it to spread idologies and get the most benfit from it I mension here, the dispute between google and brazilian government where google refuses to give information to the government saying that "the servers are in the US and therefore subject to US privacy laws" ...see? I think it's a kinda monopolizing info ... give us some good reasons I "think" that's nothing to do with infrastructure
Well, then google needs to comply. It doesn't matter really - if a site is breaking a law in another country, then they should be subject to their laws too.