Wingnut source alert. Might as well cite Stormfront.

That's what I said in my first post. Thanks to JerkMuter you didn't see it.

But it was one country that put in most of the money to develop it.

Well, that's my point. Up until now, the US has not "policed" it at all. Control was in the hands of the non profit corporation ICANN, under contract from the US Department of Commerce. The contract with USDC gave ICANN legal standing to continue doing what it already did, which was simply keep the internet running, but USDC did not exert any control over it. ICANN itself is made up of an international consortium that already includes countries like China And Russia, but being a US corporation, it was bound by US law, preventing some elements in ICANN from exerting the control they want. Moving out of the US changes all that. As for the UN controlling it, it will just end up like the UN security council, where a handful of countries make decisions for everyone else, but is so politically split that nothing effective ever gets done.
That's not entirely true. While a handful of American scientists are universally recognized as the "fathers of the internet", their work was based on multiple prior attempts at creating data networks, including those in the UK, France, Switzerland, etc. The physical networks that make the internet possible are a truly international investment, with literally every country with internet access building their own connection to the global network. So while it can be argued that the internet was an American invention, the US did not necessarily put the most money into it at all.
Wingnut source doesn't change the fact that this is actually happening. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Ok this is control of the internet, and not ability to block sites. And this is for the whole world. And I'm assuming some kind of change of hands is taking place or is the article completely false?

They're giving control to who? Is it a committee of countries or all countries or what? Either way, I don't think any country would stand up for full free expression other than if things are like how they are now. The US probably has at least a 50 / 50 split of politicians who are OK with full free speech but I doubt any other country has anything near it.

And if it were this way, porn would probably be illegal too, because an industry based on legally filmed sex is more immoral than ones based on tabacco or religion or hardware re-releases.

This is the kind of respond one get from a blinkered, neoliberal right-winger. They tend to think everyone will behave selfish and unethical like them themselves, rather than looking at the reality of the situation.

You are terribly mistaken, I'm an eyes-wide-opened realist. In my life I've seen the best, Shriner's Hospital For Children, and worst, a man who beat the crap out of a family he married into because he was big enough to do it, humanity has to offer. Only a fool looks at one extreme and believes it's the whole truth.

EDIT: Spelling

I just checked Reddit and Neogaf this morning. And literally just now, Google News, a content aggregate.

I think I would have heard/noticed something by now. What with, Science, Technology, Computer, and NASA being major focuses of my customized feed.

I'm calling bunk.

Not false at all, the transition has been planned for a long time now, but it goes into effect in October(?). Who has control isn't actually changing, they are simply moving ICANN out of the US so that it is no longer bound by US law.

There are definitely elements within the US political sphere that are all for this, simply because it will allow them the
opportunity to assert the kind of control that pesky things like the First Amendment currently prevent them from doing. This is their opportunity to "stamp out" different "scourges" like porn from the internet. This whole situation was a solution to a problem that didn't exist, spurred on by disingenuous altruistic rhetoric about "freeing" the internet from US control.
https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-03-10-en

From ICANN itself. This has been in the works for years, but much like the TPP negotiations, it wasn't really publicised, so the general public simply doesn't care.

But.. but there are three americas, which one, pal? Make up your damn mind! :P
Or... is he talking about the entire continent? If so, leave Guyana, Suriname and Belize behind, bro, these 3 poor bastards don't even qualify as America ;P

Maybe he's talking about America Ferrera.

That show was pretty stupid, not to mention really offensive to ugly people.

What about American McGee?

PFFF nothing beats good old Mugabe!
Naming your kid American is the same that naming your dog... Dog.
And I knew some dogs/cats who were just called dogs/cats.
Good lord, at least give a name based on an onomatopoeia, man, like naming your cat Meow ;P

Well, the U.S. (without Al Gore's help) did "invent" the internet, but there are contributions from far too many sources for us to claim a monopoly on it. The World Wide Web (what most people think IS the internet) is not an American invention, for example.

I don't have a problem with making it an international effort, but countries like Russia, China, North Korea, etc. should not be involved.

What about a guy named Guy.

There used to be a guy in my town with a Yorkie named Bob.