[Ecommerce] Spiegel interview with EU media commissioner: Internet not for governments

[James Love]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]

Begin forwarded message:
------------------------------------------------
From: Editerette13@aol.com
Date: November 15, 2005 6:21:40 PM EST
To: james.love@cptech.org
Subject: spiegel interview with EU media commissioner: Internet not
for governments


I translated this, the original is German... possible that Spiegel
International has a translationm . But not to worry, this is a good
and accurate translation, though incomplete, the second part, on TV
advertising, goes on, and I had no time....)
http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/politik/0,1518,385081,00.html
Interview with European Union Commissioner Reding
=84The Internet Doesn=92t Belong to Governments=93

The Media Commissioner of the EU, Viviane Reding, demands that the
USA share its power over the Internet with other countries in the
future. In a Spiegel interview she also speaks out against further
advertising limitation in Europe.

Spiegel: The World Information Summit in Tunisia this week will
concentrate on the  power of the Internet.  Up to now the USA  has
had the say.  As the head of the EU Commission negotiating team, you
want to change that. Aren=92t you overextending a bit?

Reding: The Internet is a world wide net that belongs to all the
people and all societies. It should therefore not be allowed for a
single State to control the Internet.   Icann, a private organization
in California, regulates the central technical matters right now.
But Icann makes all the major decisions under the oversight of the
American Department of Commerce.  That includes decisions that
concern Europe, Asia or Africa.  That is why the 25 EU countries
demand the agreement to a new cooperation model for the Internet,
whereby all interested countries sit at one table and jointly discuss
the crucial questions of the net.

Spiegel: But the US made clear from the onset that it will not allow
any disturbance of its omnipotence over the Internet.  They too, want
to stay tough.  That would actually mean a failure at the summit.

Reding: The new positions of the US surprised us a great deal.  Until
now it had the Department of Commerce had planned to withdraw out of
Icann in 2006.  Now the US suddenly and unilaterally declares that it
wants to insist on maintaining its historic role in the political
control of the net.

Spiegel: Which means that you could actually stay home.

Reding: Wait a minute!  We are still in negotiations, and I am
counting on the reason of our American partners.  It cannot seriously
be in America=92s interest to be confrontational instead of cooperative
in the matter of the Internet. I therefore very much hope that
Tunisia will bring about a rapprochement.  Besides, the world wide
summit will not fail simply for the fact that we will agree on many
other important issues.  For example, we all want to avoid that world
remains digitally split between rich and poor countries. We also want
to find common solutions to questions such as spam and cyber crime.

Spiegel: How do you want to deal with non democratic countries like
China and Iran, which rigorously censor and filter the net?

Reding:  It is exactly those non democratic countries that we want to
include in the new cooperation plan that we Europeans are
recommending.  If we leave them standing in the corners, there will
never be freedom of expression in those places.

Spiegel: This =93cooperation plan=94 is supposed to take the place of the
Americans?

Reding: No, it should only make it possible for the countries of this
world to discuss the key questions regarding   the Internet.  Icann
should definitely continue to do its technical work together with the
world wide Internet community, because it has functioned well in the
past. However, governments should not interfere in Icanns the day to
day business.  The Internet does not belong to the governments.  It=92s
the role of politics all the more only to define values
and set a framework for fighting abscesses like pedophilia and cyber
crime.  Politics must also see to it that individual governments
don=92t refuse their citizens free access to the Net.

Spiegel: You are not only responsible for the Internet, but also for
the conventional audio visual media.  And you=92ve just created a plan
for new so called TV guidelines, that are to replace the regulations
from the years 1989 and 1997.  New regulations from Brussels again =96
is that necessary?

Reding: The new guidelines are necessary because the audio visual
world has totally changed in the last few years.  The quantity of
product expands almost daily and takes place on ever increasing
platforms.  You can now see spots and films on cell phones, on the
Internet, or on a PDA, either linear or on video, on demand. The old
regulations no longer fit.  We want to take this opportunity to
replace antiquated, rigid regulations that no longer conform to
today=92s reality, and to get rid of superfluous restrictions in the
old guidelines, for the producers of programming.

Spiegel: For example?

Reding:  We no longer want to determine if, and how often,
programming should be interrupted by commercials.  I want to give the
networks more flexibility.  But I also don=92t want American
conditions, where the programming is interrupted every two or three
minutes by commercials.

Spiegel: What exactly does that mean?

Reding:  The heads of programming will be able to insert commercials
as he wants, according to my plan=85

Spiegel:  A commercial every five minutes for example=85?

Reding:  If he thinks that it=92ll work.  But it will remain at the
maximum of twelve minutes of advertising in an hour.  And there will
be three exceptions: Movies can only be interrupted once every 40
minutes, and news and children=92s programming only once every 20 minutes.

Spiegel:  That means, you are increasing the advertising
possibilities enormously =96 to the detriment of the quality of the
programs and to the annoyance of the viewers?

Reding:  No.  I give the programming directors more freedom, that=92s
correct and intentional.  The networks have to be more motivated in
ensuring that the programs they offer in the multi channel digital
age  are ones that  viewers still want to watch.  And we all know
that television viewers react badly when they are confronted with
advertising that is too obtrusive.

This continues for another page, but I have not time to translate the
rest.  The first part is what is relevant to the Internet community
anyway.

---------------------------------
James Love, CPTech / www.cptech.org / mailto:james.love@cptech.org /
tel. +1.202.332.2670 / mobile +1.202.361.3040