Nov. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Last week, government delegates at a summit in Tunisia gathered to ponder Internet regulation.

Right now, a lot of people think the Web is controlled by the U.S. The European Union would like a slice of that action. So, too, would the United Nations.

Here's a simple solution to the debate. The Internet should be supervised by the people who have pioneered it: You and I, ordinary people who come together spontaneously to make the Internet what it is.

The last thing it needs is any form of bureaucratic control.

There is, naturally, more at stake in any discussion of Internet control than just domain names and dot-com addresses. ``There are a number of countries that would like to influence what people see on the Internet, yet the way it is controlled makes that very difficult,'' Jonathan Zittrain, professor of Internet governance and regulation at Oxford University in the U.K., said in a telephone interview. ``In that sense, it does reflect American values and influence.''

The essence of this debate is whether the Internet is overseen by the U.S. -- or by anyone at all.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, also known as ICANN, is the closest thing that the Internet has to a regulator. It sets domain names and lays down the rules on which the Internet operates. ICANN is a U.S.-based non-profit organization that was set up by the administration of President Bill Clinton.

Tunis Summit

In the eyes of some people, that means the Internet is a U.S.-dominated medium. The World Summit on the Information Society has been meeting in Tunis to consider ways of broadening control of the Internet. ``The heart of the Internet governance debate revolves around who sets the rules for managing key Internet resources such as domain names and Internet protocol addresses,'' the summit organizers said in a statement opening the conference.

``As the globalized Internet becomes a critical element of infrastructure everywhere, many stakeholders in the WSIS process recognize that an Internet in which any single government has a pre-eminent role is no longer acceptable, nor is it sustainable,'' they said.

The EU and the UN pitched for a role in creating a new form of Internet governance. In the end, a compromise appears to have been reached in which a global forum will be created. ``The idea of a global forum seems attractive to many participants, but how such a forum would function or be financed are still being negotiated,'' said a conference statement.

`Not American'

Underlying this argument is a questionable proposition. Is the Internet really U.S.-dominated? And even if it is, is there anything wrong with that?

``The Internet does reflect certain values, in that if it had been invented in some other country it would probably look quite different,'' Zittrain said. ``But the Internet is not American, because at the edge, anyone can add to it, and it is just as good as being at the center.''

It is certainly true to say the Internet is dominated by U.S.-based individuals and companies. Its technologies were mostly created in the U.S. The big players such as Amazon.com Inc., Google Inc. and EBay Inc. are all based there.

Yet that isn't quite the same as saying they control it. For example, soccer is dominated by Brazilians, but that is just because they happen to be good at the game, not because they are stopping anyone else from kicking a round ball around a rectangular field.

Terrorism

Likewise, Americans may dominate the Internet simply because they are good at using it. There's nothing sinister about that.

There is little evidence that the U.S. is stopping anyone from using the Internet. Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda terrorist leader, is one of the most successful users of the Internet for propaganda and communications -- mainly to attack the U.S. and its interests around the world. If the U.S. really controlled the Internet for its own ends, wouldn't it have stopped him by now?

The reality of the Web is that it resists control by anyone. Over the years, lots of people have tried to impose some kind of order on the sprawling chaos of the Internet. The Chinese government has tried to control access to Web pages. Microsoft Corp. attempted to limit the type of browser we use for Internet surfing. Lots of companies have tried to push people through portals, or pull them along with pop-ups. Likewise, governments have been rattled by the unfettered access to the opinions and arguments that the Web allows.

Redistribution of Power

None of them work. The Internet is anarchic. It thrives on disruption and chaos. In reality, it is all about redistributing power and influence from the center to the fringes. Whether it is political, corporate or financial doesn't make much difference. The Web chips away at the power of people who have lots of the stuff and passes it on to those who don't.

That's why the answer to who controls the Internet should be simple: You and I.

The longer it stays that way, the better.

To contact the writer of this column: Matthew Lynn in London at matthewlynn@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: November 20, 2005 19:45 EST