United States favors limited governance to maintain innovation
15 November 2005

"Who controls the Internet?" is a question looming large over Tunis,
Tunisia, as the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)
prepares to convene November 16-18. Negotiators are spending the final
hours before the opening of the U.N. General Assembly-sanctioned
meeting to consider competing proposals on the future of Internet
governance, and specifically the domain name system (DNS).

The DNS is the equivalent of a telephone directory for the Internet.
It is a set of numeric codes that ensures an Internet user can send
e-mail to the right place, or view a Web site of interest.

The DNS is maintained by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers (ICANN), an internationally diverse, private group,
originally established by the United States government.

U.S. negotiators say that ICANN is the proper authority to continue
maintaining the technical standards of the Internet. They oppose
proposals from other nations that seek to establish an international
governing body.

Speaking to reporters in Tunis, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Communications and Information Michael Gallagher said the DNS is
designed like a compact car, and it does not need a multitude of hands
on the steering wheel.

"If you look at the rate of innovation and the rate of growth on the
Internet," Gallagher said, "and the need for the DNS mechanism to be
fluid and stable and secure and nimble to meet the growth targets and
fend off threats, it demands a very technical driver, not a political
driver."

Gallagher cited information and communication technology (ICT) growth
statistics as evidence that the creativity and innovation in this
exploding sector should not be impaired by excessive governance.
Internet users have grown from 16 million to 900 million over the last
decade, he said.

The U.S. representatives at the WSIS meeting want the energies of the
conference to be directed toward ideas that will help take the
benefits of ICTs to people in developing nations to improve their
quality of life.

The text of the transcript follows:

(begin transcript)

World Summit on the Information Society
Le Kram Expo Center, Tunis, Tunisia
November 15, 2005

Following is the transcript of a Press briefing with Tunisian media
conducted by Michael Gallagher, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Communications and Information and a Senior Advisor to the United
States Delegation to the World Summit on the Information Society on
November 15, 2005:

(begin transcript)

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: It's a great honor to be here on the
behalf of the United States and to speak with you. The World Summit on
the Information Society is a wonderful opportunity for the world to
come together to focus on the importance and the value of ICT –
Information Communication Technology – in our societies today and the
promise they bring for the future. ICT technologies are the foundation
for the future of freedom and democracy for all the world.

A hundred years ago, it took weeks for ideas to move from one country
to another or across oceans. Today those same ideas travel at the
speed of light. It is valuable and instructive to show the growth of
ICT's by comparing some numbers from just five years ago. In 1999,
there were 375 million cellular subscribers in the world and today
there are 1.4 billion wireless subscribers. The average cost of a
personal computer was over $1500 in 1999 and today it is half that.
And 13 years ago, the cost of Random Access Memory, or RAM, for your
computer was 100 times more than it is today.

The United States has enjoyed much of the benefit of these forces in
our economy and with our people. But the growth of the Internet and
the promise for the future is what we see for the rest of the world.
In 1995 there were 16 million Internet users and today there are over
900 million Internet users. So the forces of private sector
innovation, freedom of expression, democracy, and markets are moving
all of the world forward on the digital path. That is why we are here
to celebrate and focus our efforts at the World Summit.

But just as we see a bright future, we also see hazards all around us
in cyberspace and on the horizon. Viruses, malware and SPAM present
significant risks to the individual users' enjoyment of the Internet.
In 2001, the average number of virus incidents per day were 2; today
they are 4. In 2003, 3% of e-mail was viruses; in 2004, it was 6%. And
in the face of these darker forces in cyberspace, the United States
brings a message of strength and security, strength and stability, to
the rest of the world relative to the Domain Name System, or DNS. And
with opportunity in front of us and stability to support our move
forward, we look forward to the entire world benefiting from
e-commerce and distance learning and tele-health; all of these are the
future of high-speed broadband networks and what they can bring to the
world as a community.

And so it is with this message of optimism that we come to the World
Summit, and I look forward to answering your questions.

QUESTION: (translated from the French) In regards to the Summit and
Secretary of State Rice, why did she not participate?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: Secretary Rice is not here because she
has important business in the Middle East and is accompanying the
President to APEC. One other thing is the United States representation
at this World Summit is the same as it was three years ago at the last
World Summit.

QUESTION: (French) I note that Mr. Gallagher concluded his remarks on
an optimistic note, which paradoxically contrasts with the general
impression that is more pessimistic as most of the world notes that
the American position is extremely different from the various
positions of Europeans, who demand a much more active participation in
the management of the Internet, and that of other countries such as
China and Iran who call for the creation of an international
organization that participates in the management of the Internet. So
there is a contrast between the optimistic position you have presented
and a certain pessimism. So I have a simple question. The ICANN is
tasked with managing the Internet. The argument advanced by the
Americans, and by Mr. Gallagher today, is that the Americans have
assured since the creation of the Internet two things: technical
stability of the network -- the network works very well and there are
no real problems – and the liberty of expression. So I ask: are the
decisions of ICANN purely technical or have they become political. The
second part of the question: do the decisions of ICANN reflect the
tension that exists in the American society? I cite as an example the
fact that ICANN had installed the domain name for pornographic sites,
and this decision was invalidated by the American government. Can we
say that the American government, in invalidating the creation of a
domain for pornographic sites, reflect a political and cultural
position. So are ICANN's decisions purely technical?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: It is certainly a very long-winded
question. I will be much briefer in my answer. We absolutely bring a
view of optimism about, not only how far we have come in the last ten
years, but the next ten years to the rest of the world. The view of
pessimism that you say you are hearing from other countries extends
only to the political distraction of the focus on the phone book of
the Internet, or the DNS (Domain Name System). Computer prices are
continuing to fall, memory prices are continuing to fall, speeds of
networks are going up and every day more fiber is laid around the
world and that will happen no matter what the outcome of what will
happen in that room. The private sector innovation and the private
sector leadership that have brought us to this stage will continue
after the World Summit, and that is a very strong reason to stay
optimistic.

ICANN is the current manifestation of the private sector's role around
the DNS. The decisions that ICANN has made and is expected to make in
the future will continue to be very focused on private sector
innovation. ICANN does its job best when it stays out of politics.
ICANN does its job best when it focuses on the technical role that is
the core of its mission. And as for the communication that came from
the Department of Commerce to ICANN about .xxx, that communication was
one that was very much open to the world. It was very public. And the
focus of the letter was very much on requesting time and a fairness of
process from ICANN so that all in the Internet society could be heard.
And that call was echoed by the GACC, the Government Advisory
Committee Chair, as well as half a dozen other countries that
expressed similar concerns. And we understand that subject will be
taken up at the Government Advisory Committee of ICANN in early
December; that discussion will be had in that forum where it belongs.
And so I would conclude that the United States has not politicized the
issue, but that the politicization has come from those who are
critical of the path that we are on.

QUESTION: (French) Aren't you afraid that the rigidity of the ICANN
position will cause the creation of a parallel Internet by the
countries that control the Internet? Wouldn't that situation exclude a
certain number of countries from the resources and the potential about
which you just spoke?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: The U.S. position is much more clear
than it is rigid, and it is a message of clarity as to stability and
security of the DNS. That stability and security message incents ICT
infrastructures around the world and is to the benefit of all. And
today the value of the Internet is in the ability to connect to all of
those that are on it today, all the current users today. The creation
of a parallel Internet would deprive that country of connection with
the rest of the world and is not one that has serious attention from
other foreign leaders. Foreign leaders have explained to us that they
have looked at the issue and dismissed it as an alternative. And it is
easy to see why when you look at the robustness and the growth and the
excitement of the current Internet, and the growth path that we see
for its future, it is easy to see why people want to stay with that,
and the strength and stability that the United States offers behind
it, instead of going it alone.

QUESTION: I'll try to make it brief as my question is similar to ones
that have already been asked. Can you briefly present us with the
United States position during the Summit, especially as far as the
European point of view is concerned about dealing with the Internet
and about United States insisting on having the control of the net? My
second question – this Summit is supposed to try to bridge the gap
between North and South, between poor and rich people, and is there
anything you are proposing to this Summit? Thank you.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: Thank you for your question in English.
I'll answer your question in reverse order, because that is where the
priority really lies. The purpose of the World Summit and the true
focus of where our energies should be applied is to extending the
promise of the Internet to the developing world and the promise that
it holds for education and health care and productivity for the
worker. The ability to bring health care and education and freedom of
expression to the world is much, much more important than the phone
book for the device that brings it to them. And you see the clear
expression and support of the United States for those goals by the
participation outside these doors. The American private sector very
much wishes to bring the promise of the Internet and broadband
connections to all the world. And indeed the United States is not
dominating the Internet. As I mentioned, there are over 900 million
Internet users. There are only 300 million Americans, and only 200
million of them are online. So again domination is not our goal,
clarity and a sense of optimism is our message. The Internet is not
given to control by international organizations like what we see in
this other room. No bureaucrat is going to solve the problem of SPAM,
and no bureaucracy is going to solve the challenge of viruses on the
Internet. Those solutions will come from the genius and the innovation
of the world's private sector, and so the desire to internationalize
or insert government into the management of the Domain Name System is
ill-advised because it would slow the wonderful pace of innovation
that we are enjoying today. And the United States stands for optimism,
for the growth of the Internet and for innovation for all the world.

QUESTION: (French) Recently, we noted that 72% of the Internet is in
English language. What are the possibilities of liberty of expression
for those countries who do not speak English?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: I had one other comment on the previous
question, and then I will answer your question. During the discussions
in the ministerial room, what you hear is strong support for the U.S.
position from Canada and from Australia. We also know that Japan and
New Zealand are also very much supportive of the United States'
position on the importance of the private sector in its contribution
to the growth of the Internet.

The diversity of language is a particular challenge for the growth of
the DNS and the growth of the Internet. And the technicians are the
best to address that, the engineers, because they are able to adapt
the Internet system to handle different character sets and the
different challenges posed by foreign languages. And I would offer two
other points on that. It is a problem not just for the Internet; it is
a problem for software in general. And that ICANN is focused on
working with the world on solutions so that the Internet can expand
lingually as well as geographically.

QUESTION: (French) We all know that, at the end of the day, the
negotiations will be more or less over. The Summit will start tomorrow
with the speeches, etc. Now that you have followed the debates in the
ministerial, what is the objective that is most likely to succeed,
whether it be governance, or the digital divide?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: I would say that it is very difficult
to predict because the options are many and the discussions are very
fluid. There are approximately four key paragraphs and for each one of
those four paragraphs, there are multiple options and the options are
then interlinked. The negotiations are also very fluid so it is
difficult to pick which solution set will ultimately be the one
chosen. But all are still very committed to working as hard as
possible up to the last moment.

QUESTION: (French) The United States seems determined not to give in
on the issue of Internet governance. Mr. Gross has repeated also that
the internationalization of the Internet is unacceptable. Mr. Utsumi,
the Secretary General of ITU, said that the negotiations are working
towards a consensus for the creation of an international forum to
discuss this subject. This information seems to be somewhat
contradictory. We have heard about 90% of objectives attained. Can we
see, in regards to the US position, and with precision, in which
spirit you have come here? Will you maintain this position on ICANN or
are you ready to cooperate on some kind of international organization?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: As an initial proposition, and this may
be the translation, it is important to understand that no one controls
the Internet. The Internet is simply computers linked to one another
using a common protocol to speak to one another. The applications that
you see on the Internet today, whether it is Google, whether it is
listening to music, whether it is talking through skype, this is the
richness of the Internet, this is the value, and it is beyond the
control of any single country or a single entity. And so the focus of
the discussion and of Ambassador Gross' comments, that have been very
consistent with my own over the last several months, is on the DNS,
the Domain Name System only, because we both understand that the
Internet is beyond the reach and control of any single government or
individual. And the DNS is designed much like a compact car. There is
room for one to drive. It is not designed to have dozens or hundreds
of hands on the technical steering wheel. If you look at the rate of
innovation and the rate of growth on the Internet, and the need for
the DNS mechanism to be fluid and stable and secure and nimble to meet
the growth targets and fend off threats, it demands a very technical
driver, not a political driver. The United States' clear position is
in favor of the private sector driving that vehicle through ICANN than
the alternatives that have been offered here. And over the last seven
years, since 1998, the international community has benefited
substantially from that position of the United States. And so again,
the position is clear. The position is one of optimism for what the
technologies mean to the rest of the world, the true focus of the
World Summit. That position is clear. It is also clear that the
stability and security message from the United States, as with the
DNS, is that we should continue on the path we are on and look forward
to the future together. And ICANN will continue to evolve, just as it
has since it was born in 1998, to meet the growth and the challenges
of the future.

QUESTION: We can see that you came to the Summit with very
well-defined concepts. What are your expectations? And my other
question is what can we really expect from this Summit? What will it
really change in the daily lives of people? Looking all around, if you
have been downtown in the city today, everyone is asking the same
questions: What will change in our daily lives? What will it change
for those who live in the third world countries?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: We are in the midst of the dawning of
the broadband age for the world. The World Summit brings together
world leaders to learn about the true impact of broadband Internet
technologies on their societies. Commerce Secretary Evans, who
preceded our current Secretary Gutierrez, said "The greatest path
towards peace is through trade." My addition to the Secretary's vision
is that the fastest path towards peace is through the Internet.
E-commerce and the freedom of expression can happen at the speed of
light. And those are very powerful forces for all the world. And so
what does it mean to the man or the woman or the child on the street
of the developing country? What it means is the growth of networks
that they have not had built in their countries yet. And those
networks can come via fiber optics, via satellite, via cable, via
telephone copper wires. And today we see explosive growth in new
wireless technologies. Last summer, Vodafone did a study of the
adoption of wireless communications in Africa and concluded that, in
fact, for most of the world, their first computer and their first
exposure to the Internet will be over a wireless device. And those
connections enable farmers to know what the price is at market for
their goods directly from the market place and not through a
middleman. Those same networks allow a doctor to diagnose an ill child
from a thousand miles away. Those same networks allow the finest
knowledge, the richest compilations of knowledge, at world-leading
universities to be available to students around the world. And that
exposure to freedom and that exposure to innovation will lead the
youth of today to a brighter, more peaceful world tomorrow. So
basically it comes down to text-messaging and ring tones.

QUESTION: (French) It is rather optimistic on your part to say
stability where others say rigid. It is also amusing for an Assistant
Secretary to note that bureaucracy has never solved anything. Don't
you think that another structure, where there are private entities,
NGO's, universities, could not produce a multilingual DNS, with
Arabic, Chinese, etc? Couldn't they resolve such a problem?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY GALLAGHER: The point you reach is a good one,
especially that the bureaucrat criticizes the bureaucracy. I
appreciate that very much. But I am very much a product of the private
sector. My history is very much one of working with world-leading
companies on very interesting technologies. President Bush and
Secretary Gutierrez expect me to put that DNA into the U.S.
bureaucracy, and not have the DNA of the bureaucracy going into me.
And the structure that would best address your concern is, instead of
balkanizing the technical management of the day-to-day traffic, which
would be a great risk to the ability of packets to get to and from
their destination quickly, the better alternative would be for the
academic and technical excellence in the university systems around the
world, especially in the linguistic area, to interface with ICANN and
help them achieve the objective faster. The outreach that ICANN has
with the world goes beyond just governments. It should encompass the
leading minds of universities as well. And that would hopefully
accelerate a more rapid adoption of more languages into the Internet
itself. Thank you.

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)