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

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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)

    Membership Issues Looking to the DNSO
    posted by jon on Monday May 21 2001, @08:14AM

    Earlier this month, ICANN's At Large Study Committee held a meeting at which it received a briefing on "the DNSO's efforts to achieve more effective participation in policy development" through "user groups." The person giving the briefing explained that the DNSO was moving towards rough consensus on the work of two "DNSO workgroups" (which ones, I wonder?). The At-Large Study Committee, for its part, asked to "stay in close touch with the DNSO on these efforts," and expressed hope that the DNSO would reach an "early conclusion on voting and policy development (proposed structures) so this could be factored into the ALSC's work." I'm pretty sure this refers to the languishing report of Working Group D, on rules for working groups. (Ya gotta wonder, though, will the Names Council ever create any more open working groups? There's been exactly one new one since the summer of 1999.)

    This looks like a Really Bad Idea . . .

    As I wrote about six months ago, the track record of the DNSO with regard to bottom-up policy development hasn't exactly been good. Initially, the Names Council began by establishing broad-based working groups on a variety of issues. Its results, however, were mixed. Working Group A was able to develop a UDRP proposal, and the Names Council did approve that proposal. But Working Group A's plan was the target of considerable criticism on process and substantive grounds; the Names Council's approval was without extensive discussion and amounted to a rubber stamp. The ICANN Board reacted by setting aside the proposal in favor of a different one drafted by a registrars' group, with the caveat that the new plan would be modified further by Louis Touton in consultation with persons chosen by ICANN staff. The final plan owed little to the proposal that emerged from the DNSO.

    The upshot of the work of Working Group B (on "sunrise" protection for trademarks) was that the DNSO was unable to generate any coherent recommendation. The Names Council issued a statement, but with little content: While the Names Council managed to recommend that "there should be varying degrees of protection for intellectual property during the startup phase of new top-level domains," the statement stopped there. It did not speak at all to the nature and strength of that protection or how it should be achieved.

    Working Group C was able to reach some consensus points, but the Names Council was unwilling to endorse them; instead, it issued a statement of stunning generality, addressing almost none of the key policy issues raised by the deployment of new top-level domains. Those issues, rather, were left to be decided, either explicitly or sub silentio, by the ICANN staff and board. Ironically, the ICANN Board ultimately reached a result close to that of Working Group C notwithstanding the Names Council's conspicuous non-approval of its work product.

    Working Group D's report is now before the Names Council, nearly two years after its task was assigned. That task was the development of rules for open DNSO working groups. Recently, however, the Names Council has shifted away from open working groups, in favor of doing its work in groups composed entirely (or almost entirely) of Names Council members, such as its Review Task Force, its committee on UDRP review, and its new committee on alternate roots. This approach has come at the cost of eliminating meaningful bottom-up participation -- as I noted above, only one open DNSO working group has been created since the summer of 1999. It's unclear, therefore, how often the WG-D rules will be used (if, indeed, they are used at all).

    Nor should any of this be surprising, given the Names Council's odd and unrepresentative structure. Let's hope the ALSC's momentary attraction to the DNSO model is just the result of fleeting bad information.

      ICANNWatch Login  


    [ 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  
  • wrote
  • At Large Study Committee
  • meeting
  • report
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Looking to the DNSO | Log in/Create an Account | Top | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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.

    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