Shadowstalker16: What exactly does this mean? Websites are still private property. Governments can already block those sites issuing legislation / court rulings blaming ''harm caused by the internet'' on ISPs, forcing them to block. What does this change?
Blocks at the ISP level can be bypassed. This is control of the internet itself, which can't be bypassed. A site that runs up against one country's laws can get removed from the internet entirely, instead of just blocked in the locality where it offended. Additionally, sites can be blocked from ever getting onto the internet in the first place, if they are deemed undesirable in some way. Imagine if the comittee that ends up in control is made up of a majority that shares political positions like that of Turkey's president. Now when political dissention occurs, it might not just be Twitter in Turkey that gets blocked, Twitter worldwide can be blocked. Granted, this could be an extreme scenario, but it is a possible scenario nonetheless. All we can hope for at this point is the political forces coming to some kind of balanced method of control, but when our only example of international control is the unbelievably unbalanced UN, I feel that hope is very small.