This might be of general interest -- and I haven't seen anybody
forward a copy to this list yet (apologies if you've already read
it elsewhere).
ICANN's annual budget of US$5.9M seems awfully high. What do they do with
all that money? Is the budget broken down and available for public
viewing?
Just out of interest, of course. No disparaging inferences necessarily
intended.
Joe
----- Forwarded message from J. William Semich <bill@mail.nic.nu> -----
To: wwtld@ripe.net, member@aptld.org, lactld@nic.mx, quaynor@ghana.com,
discuss@dnso.org, members@iatld.org
From: "J. William Semich \(NIC JWS7\)" <bill@mail.nic.nu>
Subject: New York Times: Internet Board Oversteps Its Authority
Precedence: bulk
FYI, see the attached text file, or, if you are an online NYT subscriber
(free subscription), go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/06/biztech/articles/07ican.html
which also has some additional info.
Best wishes,
Bill Semich (NIC JWS7)
.NU Domain (Niue, the South Pacific)
Member, APTLD
June 7, 1999
Critics See Internet Board Overstepping Its Authority
By JERI CLAUSING
WASHINGTON -- They were mysteriously appointed, they meet
behind closed doors and they have questionable public
accountability. Yet members of the interim board of the
Internet's new oversight body are beginning to make
decisions and shape policy that could ultimately affect
everyone who uses the global network.
To finance the $5.9 million annual budget of the oversight
body, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers, or Icann, this temporary board has voted to levy a
$1 a year tax on the more than four million Internet
addresses, or domain names, that end in .com, .net and .org.
The board is also planning to impose tens of thousands of
dollars in licensing and other fees on companies that want
to get into the business of dispensing Internet addresses.
Recently, the board endorsed controversial recommendations
for establishing a new global framework for resolving
disputes over who can and cannot use certain words in their
Internet addresses.
Esther Dyson, the chairwoman of the interim board, which was
set up last year, says the group is carrying out its
government-mandated charge to break up the current monopoly
in Internet name registration and to move Internet
governance to the private sector.
But critics say the board is overstepping its authority and
ignoring another mandate -- to create a transparent,
bottoms-up organization. Instead, they say, the board is
working behind the scenes with powerful international
corporate and government interests to create a top-down
hierarchy that flies in the face of the free-wheeling,
consensus-based spirit that built the Internet.
Such sentiments are but the latest chapter in yearslong
sniping fueled by international jealousies and myriad
conspiracy theories. What is different now, some observers
say, is that the Internet, which is built on a cooperative
technology for routing data around the globe is in less
stable hands -- increasing the risk that angry factions will
in effect secede from the network, damaging its integrity by
splitting it into several smaller, disconnected networks.
Although such a split is considered unlikely, anxiety over
who is running the show could curb investments in the
rapidly growing electronic commerce industry.
"The risks are that Icann has a little bit of authority but
very little legitimacy," said Bill Whyman, an Internet
analyst for the Legg Mason investment company in Washington.
"This is an awkward consensus-building process. If it pushes
too far and causes itself to lose support among key
constituencies, Icann itself can be undercut. Then you have
a very bad situation with no one in control. Then you have a
very bad situation for e-commerce."
Icann was created last year by one of the Internet's
founding fathers, Jon Postel, as the Clinton administration
moved to complete the privatization of the Internet. The
U.S. government, which financed the creation of the Internet
over several decades, had begun privatizing the network in
1995 by turning over responsibility for domain name
registration -- that is, the assigning of Internet addresses
-- to a Virginia-based company, Network Solutions Inc.
But as Network Solutions' lucrative government-sanctioned
monopoly became increasingly controversial, the
administration made it a top priority to introduce
competition into the registration business -- while also
transferring oversight of the Internet to a private
international body. While a Commerce Department report last
June mapped out the principles and goals for such a body,
there were very few specifics spelled out.
Icann was set up as a nonprofit organization by Postel, a
computer scientist at the University of Southern California
who for years administered the address numbering system
behind Internet domain names. But he died unexpectedly
shortly after the interim board was named last fall, turning
unanswered questions about how he selected the members into
something of an Internet mystery.
Whatever its origins, the interim board now has nine members
-- plus the corporation's temporary president, Michael
Rogers. In addition to Ms. Dyson, a well-known Internet
analyst, publisher and entrepreneur, the board includes
telecommunications executives and academics from the United
States, Europe, Asia, Australia and Latin America.
Though the interim board had been expected to set up the
procedures for building up a broad-based Icann membership
that might elect a full-time board, the interim group has
itself become a policy-making body.
Some critics say Icann pushed too far last month in Berlin,
when it endorsed in principle recommendations of a report
from the World Intellectual Property Organization for
cracking down on cybersquatters, the speculators who
register and then try to resell popular domain names, and
for resolving disputes over who has the right to trademarks
registered as Internet addresses.
The board referred the report to Icann's domain name
committee, which is to recommend ways to meet the goals. But
to many, the deck seems stacked in favor of big corporations
and trademark holders since a key part of that committee --
members representing noncommercial name holders -- has not
yet been appointed by the board. Icann has yet to appoint
the at-large members who will elect half of the permanent
board.
Until a board is elected, Icann is largely responsible only
to the Commerce Department, which endorsed its creation and
is pushing for quick establishment of dispute-resolution
mechanisms so that Icann can set up full-scale competition
in the registration business.
"There is a lot of pressure to introduce competition," said
A. Michael Froomkin, a University of Miami law professor who
was on the panel of experts that advised the World
Intellectual Property Organization, an arm of the United
Nations, in its drafting of the report.
In response to that pressure, Froomkin says, voicing a
common criticism, Icann is "going fast on the decision
making instead of going faster on doing the setting up" of
an elected board.
Ms. Dyson, however, says Icann is caught between special
interest groups: noisy critics crying for the board to slow
down and quieter interests with a large stake in the
process, who are insisting that the board move faster,
particularly to resolve disputes over domain names and
trademarks.
"It's frustrating to hear 'Let's go slow; let's go fast,"'
she said. "I just want to hear legitimate criticism of what
we may or may not do. Let's argue it on the merits."
Among those leading the charge to put the brakes on Icann's
policy making is Network Solutions, which built the
international registry for top level domains like .com, .net
and .org under its exclusive government contract. It also
controls the main server, the so-called root of the
Internet, for the global network and built a $25 million
shared registry system that is currently being tested with
five companies. The first of those companies, Register.com,
will begin competing with Network Solutions on Monday.
But Network Solutions is still negotiating with the Commerce
Department on terms for permanently opening up its registry,
the data base of all registered domains, to competitors. The
company has refused to apply to become an official Icann
registrar when full-scale competition is opened. The company
says Icann's licensing terms give the governance body too
much regulatory authority, including the ability to cancel a
company's accreditation -- and thus its business -- at whim.
Network Solutions argues that the interim board should be
doing nothing more than setting minimum technical standards
for the competing registries.
"They have turned what is supposed to be a standards-setting
body into a regulatory commission," said Donald L. Telage,
the company's senior vice president.
Executives from Network Solutions have taken their case to
Capitol Hill, where they were working feverishly last week
to persuade key members to hold oversight hearings on the
actions of both Icann and the Commerce Department.
Ms. Dyson and Becky Burr, a senior Commerce Department
adviser who is overseeing the formation of Icann, declined
to comment on Network Solutions' complaints, citing their
continued talks with the company.
To be sure, Network Solutions has a great incentive to
protect the monopoly it has enjoyed since 1995. But the
company is not alone in questioning the interim board's
authority for setting permanent policies.
"It's a real tricky game," said Dave Farber, a professor of
computer science at the University of Pennsylvania and a
board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the
Internet civil liberties group. "You may want an interim
agreement, but I don't think that the interim board should
put in place anything that is not revocable."
He added: "I believe that the mandate that they were given
was to form a stable organization representative in some way
or another of a community. I don't think they should be
making critical decisions that they don't have to."
The elected board is not expected to be in place until next
spring, and Ms. Dyson said she expected that the decision on
adding new domains would be delayed until then. She and her
board dismiss much of the criticism as merely a continuation
of the contentious debate that has been part of this process
for three years. But many critics say the board has brought
much of the skepticism on itself.
The paucity of details about how the interim board was
created has fostered an Internet conspiracy theory that the
board is carrying out a hidden agenda.
Ms. Dyson takes strong exception to such theories.
"When they asked me, they did not ask me to do anything in
particular," she said of her being asked to serve on Icann.
"I do not represent corporate interests; I represent the
little guy."
Adding to the mistrust, however, was the board's refusal to
hold open board meetings.
"Whenever you do things in a smoke-filled room," Farber
said, "even if you are the most honest people in the world,
people will suspect you are not honest."
Jeri Clausing at jeri@nytimes.com welcomes your comments and
suggestions.
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Join the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
http://www.democracy.org.nz/idno/
--
This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send
a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz.
For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/