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)


     
    gTLDs hoping to enter the legacy root Cerf's Principle: A String Should Enter the Root if It Does No Harm
    posted by michael on Thursday March 27 2003, @09:47AM

    Lawrence Solum writes "The worst thing to do with a resource is waste it. That has been ICANN's basic policy toward the root--waste the resource by maintaining a virtually static root. In November 2000, ICANN held a beauty contest that expanded the root just a little bit. In Rio, ICANN set in motion yet another beauty contest that would expand the root an even smaller bit. But there was also a change in tone. Vint Cerf articulated an important principle regarding the root. He suggested that the fundamental principle that should govern expansion of the root is that new TLDs should be allowed in the root as long as they will do no harm. Let me repeat that. Cerf's Principle: A new TLD should be allowed in the root so long as it does no harm. But wait, there's more."



    "When the meeting started, the notion of a market-driven allocation process looked like it was in big trouble. But by the end of the public forum, the factions within ICANN that are holding on to the idea of a static root were on the defensive. (Their slogan is: Don't push the problems of the second level to the top. I would put it: Don't allow the economic miracle of millions of SLDs pollute the last part of the DNS to be managed by top-down engineering, the pure and holy root.) Even those who advocate wasting the root were beginning to talk about the inevitabiity of market approaches. Even Stuart Lynn was talking about demand-driven approaches!

    Of course this is ICANN, never underestimate the possibilities for strategic blocking in a consensus-driven, bottom-up, entrenched-stakeholder organization. But the consensus at the dinner after the public forum was that the tone of the debate had changed. Milton Mueller, who is usually a bit on the dour side, was ebullient. The defenders of a static root are only going through the motions. Beauty contests are under attack. Market-driven approaches are on the intellectual offensive. Will it make a difference? Well, the proof is in the pudding and at ICANN, puddings usually are in the oven for a very long time! For more on the ICANN meeting, see my Legal Theory Blog and gTLD-Auctions.net."

     
      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  
  • ICANN
  • Vinton G. Cerf
  • Milton Mueller
  • Legal Theory Blog
  • gTLD-Auctions.net
  • Lawrence Solum
  • More on gTLDs hoping to enter the legacy root
  • Also by michael
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Cerf's Principle: A String Should Enter the Root if It Does No Harm | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 3 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.
    First Law of the Internet
    by KarlAuerbach on Thursday March 27 2003, @01:10PM (#11389)
    User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/

    Quite some time ago I formulated what I call "the First Law of the Internet". I believe it provides a better formulation than a simply saying "do no harm".

    The reason that I believe that it is better is that the "do no harm" approach is that there is almost aways some grounds for someone somewhere to claim that he/she is harmed.

    My formulation makes it clear that anyone who claims harm must be asserting a harm to the public and places the burden of proving his/her case onto the person asserting the harm.

    Here it is:

    The First Law of the Internet

    Every person shall be free to use the Internet in any way that is privately beneficial without being publicly detrimental.

    • The burden of demonstrating public detriment shall be on those who wish to prevent the private use.

      • Such a demonstration shall require clear and convincing evidence of public detriment.

    • The public detriment must be of such degree and extent as to justify the suppression of the private activity.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Dourness and Ebullience
    by Mueller ({mueller} {at} {syr.edu}) on Saturday March 29 2003, @08:26AM (#11395)
    User #2901 Info | http://istweb.syr.edu/~mueller/
    On Wednesday evening I, the "usually dour" one, was smashed on caipirinhis and had been line dancing with a semi-nude Brazilian samba dancer in a feather boa and thong.

    But yeah, we're turning the tide on new TLDs, and that's cause for ebullience.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply 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