The difference in the US we have this thing called the 1st Amendment. This Constitutional right has protected numerous attempts to censor the Internet. Now, ICAAN will be moved away from US laws and has ZERO protection. Now we can expect taxation and censorship on a grande scale.
So, its not about centralization. Its about the central entity that has absolute power to act in its own interest as well as corporate and lobbying influence.
We think media centralization is bad...now our only communication method that allows for freedom of speech and expression is now under control of the very entities our existing rights protect us against.
THERE IS PLENTY TO WORRY ABOUT!!!! WAKE UP
We are the only country with free speech?
Interestingly enough if you look up an index reviewing freedoms of people across the world the United States doesn't even make it in the top ten.
No, you should read my post again and ask yourself that question. Attempted censorship of the Internet has been thwarted by the 1st amendment. Interesting is why we need to transfer management in the first place. Do we have censorship issues right now on the Internet? What is the purpose? Ask Internet users in China and Russia how much they love censorship. Now ask US citizens how much they love freedom of speech and expression on the Internet. Your argument is not relevant in the context of the Internet.
@kryptik i get from your responses that giving ICAAN management control of the Internet is ok by you. My position is that it is very bad for you, me, and everyone on planet earth. Have a good day.
The argument that one nation should "own" the Internet is not relevant being as it's users are a global community not a national community. No one country should possess the Internet being as their views may be incongruent with the rest of the world. Is this fair to a global community? Has the American propaganda really diluted you so much that you think we are the sole torch of freedom around the world?