The World Conference on International Communications unraveled overnight in Dubai, as a group of Western nations led by the U.S., U.K. and Canada rejected a treaty from the U.N.'s telecom body that would have given foreign governments greater control over the Internet. U.S. policymakers quickly backed the decision by the American delegation, with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle joining a host of trade and public interest groups and the Obama administration in issuing statements supporting the decision to walk out on the treaty (PDF). Because the International Telecommunications Union has no authority to immediately change how the Internet functions, it is uncertain how the treaty will affect international telecom operations when it takes effect in 2015 among the countries that ratify it. For now, it appears the group of nonprofits that govern the Internet will continue to oversee its infrastructure.
Western nations had been apprehensive for months that countries such as Russia and China, which censor Web traffic, would push for greater ability to control what their citizens can access. Those fears came true earlier this week with the addition of language into the treaty stating that all countries have a right to help manage the Internet. The head of the ITU expressed surprise at the turn of events, and denied any attempt to "hijack the Internet" by the U.N. body. He stressed that the text in the treaty was non-binding, even though policymakers in the U.S. have exposed vehement opposition to such sentiments leading up to Dubai. U.S. representatives were also concerned about a provision regarding spam, which they believe could also be used by some countries to censor Web content. According to the BBC, the final breaking point appeared to be the insertion of language related to human rights, which was called for by a bloc of African nations. That language concerned both Western nations as a pretext for interfering with the structure of the Web, and countries like China that have long records of human rights abuses.
Panel Sidelines Drone Strike Measure: The House Juduciary Committee adversely reported a measure (H Res 819) on Thursday from Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich that would have compelled the Obama administration to hand over to the panel its legal justification for using drone strikes to kill terrorist targets overseas. Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, urged his colleagues to report the measure adversely, arguing the administration has made "at least some effort" to respond to lawmakers. The Congressional Research Service has said the use of drones in non-combat areas has raised questions about the scope of the global war on terror and who qualifies as a participant. The killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen, in 2011 has helped fuel skepticism on the Hill over the use of drones, particularly against Americans. Lawmakers Meet With Data Brokers Over Children's Privacy Concerns: Reps. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and Ed Markey, D-Mass., met with data brokers on Thursday to discuss how they treat information collected and shared about consumers online. The lawmakers are particularly concerned about the youngest consumers, and are working on legislation that would prevent companies from tracking children under the age of 15 either online or by their mobile devices. The pair plan to reintroduce their children's privacy bill (HR 1895) next year. Children's privacy legislation appears to stand a better chance at passage than broader online privacy regulations, which are fiercely opposed by many lawmakers and most Web companies. Panel Endorses Location Privacy Bill: The Senate Judiciary Committee advanced a bill on Thursday from Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn. that would require app developers to get express consent from smartphone users before collecting or sharing their location data with other companies. The targeted effort to limit mobile tracking is the first major legislation generated by Franken's new Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy. Full panel Ranking Member Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, called the bill "well-intended" but argued it could hurt portions of the fast-growing tech sector. Recent news reports have highlighted the fact many popular smartphone apps collect and share users' location data, often without them knowing. ICYMI: Full Transcript of House Energy and Commerce Hearing on Spectrum Auctions. CALM Act Takes Effect: CQ's Ambreen Ali reports that Rep. Anna G. Eshoo yesterday kicked off her birthday at a news conference to celebrate the long-awaited implementation of the CALM Act, which requires broadcasters, cable and satellite TV providers to keep ads at the same volume as surrounding programming. “I never dreamed that it would strike the chord that it did with the American people,” the Silicon Valley Democrat said. “Today is the beginning of a new era of quieter TV.”Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, the law’s Senate sponsor, acknowledged that the issue pales in comparison to the debate under way over middle-class tax cuts and the so-called fiscal cliff, but called it "one less nuisance, one less annoyance, for regular people in their regular lives."
Joining the lawmakers on stage were the heads of the National Association of Broadcasters, the National Cable and Telecommunications Association and the Advanced Television Systems Committee, which coordinated the technical changes needed for TV stations to control volume. Under the law, the FCC will monitor stations to ensure they are complying and that commercials are no louder than the shows during which they air. Consumers will also be able to notify regulators of violators. But the act (PL 111-311) notably does not apply to shows aired online, an increasingly popular medium, or commercials on the radio.