ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    .eu and Europe too European Parliament to ICANN: Shape Up (and be Less US-Centric, Too)
    posted by michael on Tuesday March 27 2001, @03:32PM

    The European Parliament recently produced its wish list for ICANN and the Internet.

    Under the title, 'The Organisation and Management of the Internet - International and European Policy Issues 1998-2000', the resolution begins with several recitations, notably the Parliament's belief that "balanced international representation must be achieved within ICANN ... so that due account may be taken of all five geographical areas covered by the organisation," and that "the European Union is at a competitive disadvantage with respect to North America as regards the infrastructure required for the expansion of the Internet." The resolutions go on to demand democracy, transparency, stronger intellectual property protection, and - especially - further distancing from the U.S. government.

    What does this mean for ICANN? Although I'm no expert on decoding EuroParliament-speak, I think it means at least three things.

    1. The EU wishes to have European Internet matters decided at the EU level, rather than the national level – and that includes much ccTLD policy (so much for subsidiarity!). It wants parity before ICANN with the U.S. government.
    2. As a result, the EU remains convinced (despite what would seem an increasing pile of contrary evidence) that ICANN control of the DNS is better than the U.S. government control of the DNS. This also suggests that a collision between the Senator Burns vision of the next few years (see below) and the EU vision is fairly likely.
    3. Perhaps most significant in the short run, the EU is putting down a couple of markers for ICANN, warning it not to abolish the at-large, or to cut out representation of areas, such as Africa, with almost no current voters. And, the EU is telling ICANN that it better improve its procedures.
    I've reproduced several of the most interesting parts of the resolution inside....



    Among the key resolutions are these:
    The Parliament
    • "Emphasises the need for all five geographical areas covered by ICANN to be represented by democratically elected representatives on the organisation's Board of Directors"
    • "neither the Commission, nor the US Government, nor other governments should interfere in the organisation and management of the Internet, but they should give it sufficient independence and a legal basis at international level, so that it may be an independent network;"
    • "Supports the continuation of the self-regulatory basis of ICANN's operations, but emphasises that the EU must ensure that ICANN works within the principles of existing international codes, particularly the WIPO protocols;"
    • "Considers it necessary to guarantee the independence of ICANN from the US Government and to define the legal framework to which it must adhere in future, on the understanding that it is of paramount importance to maintain international neutrality if ICANN is to play a key role in the global development of the information society; considers, similarly, that all continents must be represented on it;"
    • "calls on the Commission and the ICANN Board to ensure that '.EU' is created as soon as possible;"
    • supports the ICANN-UDRP (although it erroneously calls it "the WIPO's arbitration service in respect of the registration of domain names which infringe trademarks")
    • " Notes that it took a long time to introduce the seven new domain names and that the time thus lost needs to be made up as quickly as possible; maintains, more generally, the need for a more transparent and democratic process when other new domain names are created in the future;"

    Read the full text of the European Parliament resolution on the Commission communication to the Council and the European Parliament on 'The Organisation and Management of the Internet - International and European Policy Issues 1998-2000' (COM(2000) 202 - C5-0263/2000 - 2000/2140(COS))

    [To respond, or start a new comment thread, click the "Send Your Comment" button in the yellow box to the right.]

     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
      Related Links  
  • European Parliament resolution on the Commission communication to the Council and the European Parliament on 'The Organisation and Management of the Internet - International and European Policy Issues 1998-2000' (COM(2000) 202 - C5-0263/2000 - 2000/2140(COS))
  • produced its wish list
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    European Parliament to ICANN: Shape Up (and be Less US-Centric, Too) | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 2 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Four questions to the EP rapporteur
    by alexander on Wednesday March 28 2001, @05:55AM (#457)
    User #22 Info | http://www.icannchannel.de
    Massimo Carraro MEP, the rapporteur of the European Parliament on the Commission's DNS policy communication, answered the following questions:

    The EP wants the .eu top level domain "as soon as possible" -- what do you see as the main advantages of a Dot-EU domain?
    This would mean to give all European Internet Users an instrument which is more familiar with them and nearer to them. This should help developing Internet more and more. The creation of Dot-Eu domain name gives Enterprises that wish to operate across the Internal market a specific European identification which will be recognized globally.

    You are demanding "the independence of ICANN from the US Government". Why do you think this is necessary and do you think it will be achieved in the foreseeable future?
    Why the independence of ICANN from the US Government? Because Internet
    is a worldwide instrument and if we want a function of global Net, it is not correct to think about an involvement of a Government, neither of the U.S Government, nor of the EU Commission, of course. It must be an organism absolutely independent from every political power. I think that this can be achieved also because this trend has been enforced by the U.S. Administration too. The European Commission should do the same.

    In its resolution, the EP calls for "a transparent membership process" and "democratically elected representatives". Currently, ICANN is studying whether the At Large membership will continue electing part
    of the Board of Directors. What would be your recommendation to ICANN?

    I do not have any particular recommendation, because ICANN is acting really well. The only thing I warmly suggest is to grant the participation of all continents in the ICANN Board of Directors.

    In general, the Parliament seems to be content with the way the
    Commission has dealt with this issue. Do you see room for improvement and if so, where?

    Generally speaking the EU Parliament agreed with the way the Commission has dealt with this issue. We have to be very careful and avoid that bureaucrats enter ICANN Management. We have to create homogeneous rules at European level for the Market development, but we do not have to have any interference by political or administrative Authorities in the ICANN Management.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: European Parliament to ICANN: Shape Up (and be
    by joppenheimer on Friday March 30 2001, @06:18AM (#464)
    User #5 Info | http://JudithOppenheimer.com
    Question #3 in the comment above ... In its resolution, the EP calls for "a transparent membership process" and "democratically elected representatives". Currently, ICANN is studying whether the At Large membership will continue electing part of the Board of Directors. What would be your recommendation to ICANN?

    Massimo Carraro MEP, the rapporteur of the European Parliament on the Commission's DNS policy communication, replies, "I do not have any particular recommendation, because ICANN is acting really well..."

    In which case, exactly what "transparent membership process" and "democratically elected representatives" is the EP referring to?

    Do we really need *more* ICANNish babble-speak mucking up the DNS?

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com