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)


     
    Board of Directors Conflict of interest on .org? The problem of multiple Blokzijls
    posted by Mueller on Tuesday May 14 2002, @12:26PM

    Those of us who were not in Accra had trouble understanding what happened to the DNSO policy statement on .org. We were particularly amazed by how the Board, without any warning or any supporting public record, abandoned the DNSO recommendation to give .org to a non-profit organization, proposing to allow major commercial registries to bid for it.

    Now it is possible to understand better what happened. It seems that the major registries are even closer to the Board than we imagined.




    One of the companies that has been making it clear that they want to be involved with .org is Neulevel. According to one knowledgeable source, before Accra they were making it known that four people were assigned to the .org bid full time.

    According to the transcript, Board member Robert Blokzijl issued the stern warning that “there are not many organizations that have a demonstrated experience in running a registry with 3 million registered names.” This point was then picked up by Pisanty to guide the Board away from a nonprofit requirement. Seeking clear direction, Stuart Lynn asked whether he was being told to make “the foremost requirement” to delegate the .org registry to someone with “demonstrate[d] experience in operating a registry of scale.” The answer was yes. See the transcript on the ICANN site.

    Such a criterion basically narrows the field to incumbents Verisign, Neulevel, Afilias, Core, and perhaps DE-NIC and Nominet UK, although Blokzijl also commented that “this is a little bit more than running a country code top-level domain” – a rather odd statement given the scale at which Nominet and DE-NIC operate. And since .org cannot be divested to Verisign, that little turn in the discussion massively enhanced Neulevel’s prospects, making it one of two or three leading candidates.

    As it happens, Mr. Blokzijl has a special relationship to Neulevel. His wife, Lynn Hardy Blokzijl, was hired by Neulevel a few months after they were married. She registered for the Marina del Rey meeting as a Neulevel employee.

    Maybe this is just a coincidence. It is possible that Mr. Blokzijl's insistence that .org be given to a company with "demonstrated experience" and the Board's subsequent vote to permit commercial applicants was a legitimate concern unrelated to Neulevel's lobbying campaign. It is possible that Neulevel's hiring of Mrs. Blokzijl had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that she was married to a Board member.

    Even so, given the sharp deviation from unanimously approved DNSO recommendations, the incident raises concerns about what really drives ICANN decisions. Perhaps ICANN’s Conflict of Interest committee should look into this.

    Oh, by the way, the committee is chaired by Mr Blokzijl.


     
      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  
  • transcript
  • Conflict of Interest committee
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Conflict of interest on .org? The problem of multiple Blokzijls | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 34 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.
    Re: Conflict of interest on .org? The problem of B
    by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Tuesday May 14 2002, @01:14PM (#6334)
    User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
    It seems to me that each and every time ICANN makes a change within the scope of a registry (adding new TLDs, rebidding a TLD), the only ones that really get to play are the encumbants.

    It's one big old boys club, with everyone on the outside being told to stay out in the cold.

    This isn't competition.

    ++Peter
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Conflict of interest on .org? The problem of m
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Tuesday May 14 2002, @03:43PM (#6337)
    User #2810 Info
    This is outrageous. It calls for nothing short of Mr Blokzijl's immediate resignation from the Board. It also calls into question the judgement of the rest of the Board. Were they unaware that Mrs. Blokzijl, registered as a NeuLevel representative, was related by marriage to Mr Blokzijl, a Board member? If they were unaware of that they must have been willfully blind. If they were aware of that it is their duty as Directors to deal with the conflict of interest. Instead they chose to acquiesce in this hijack.

    This is a clear (but far from the only) case of ICANN's web of corruption. All that is left is for the USG (or a lawsuit by an aggrieved party) to finally kick in the rotted door. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Conflict of interest on .org? The problem of m
    by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Wednesday May 15 2002, @09:27AM (#6380)
    User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
    It is also very apparent that Afilias was caught with their pants down when they failed to get .WEB out of ICANN. Their projections were based on .WEB, and the fact that they got .INFO not only blew those projections, but also caused most of their funding to be withdrawn. They're doing anything they can to stay afloat, and failing.

    This whole smelly line about how .ORG must be given to a company that has already proven their ability to run a large TLD is merely an excuse to ensure that an established player gets it. At least ICANN is transparent in this one regard.

    ++Peter
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: NeuStar employees favorite place
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Friday May 17 2002, @09:17PM (#6442)
    User #2810 Info
    Owch, sounds brutal. And for some good people. Just how bad is it? And wazzup with ".org is in the bag"? -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    Re: Conflict of interest on .org? The problem of m
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Tuesday May 21 2002, @08:28PM (#6470)
    User #2810 Info
    SFAIK, Pud has yet to post pictures of the Bat-headed boy in Accra, and we'll know soon enough if there's more NeuLevel layoffs. -g
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 7 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • 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