| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
.af Redelegation: Another Government-Initiated Redelegation
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 10 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
|
" a country's ccTLD, as all its resources, is a "property" of its government."
I'd really like to know what you think the source of this property right is. Is it natural law? Divine law? Public international law (if so, please specify the written instrument)?
From my perspective a ccTLD is an address in a private file held in Virginia. Rights to it are determined by a contract between the ccTLD operator and persons responsible for controlling that file. They stem from private, contract law. DoC doesn't have all the rights in a ccTLD if only because its agent and/or predecessor in interest has contracted them away.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
I believe that you will find a great deal of disagreement with the assertion that a ccTLD is the property of the nation to which the ccTLD refers.
As Michael points out, there are many, ICANN included, who adhere to the belief that a ccTLD is nothing but an entry in a database that is managed by ICANN, oops, by IANA, subject to constraints from the US Dep't of Commerce.
ICANN's own written policies, as well as its actions, indicate that the opinion of the government referenced by the ccTLD is but one element in ICANN's, oops, in IANA's, decisions about who is the proper operator.
Because ICANN, oops, IANA, has the ability to make subjective decisions about who gets to run a ccTLD, ICANN is in a position to coerce those who wish to obtain control of a ccTLD into desired modes of behavior, the most overt being that the recipient enters into a ccTLD agreement with ICANN in order to receive ICANN's, oops IANA's, blessing for the ccTLD transfer.
The idea that a ccTLD is a direct aspect of a national sovreignty is challanged when one looks at ICANN's continuing demand that ccTLD operators open their computer records so that ICANN, oops IANA, has unconstrained ability to do zone file transfers of the ccTLD's zone even when doing so is a likely violation of the nation's data privacy laws. (It is all the worse because those zone transfers have no technical justification - they contain no information not available by other less intrusive means that is relevant to the stable operation of the delegation linkage from the DNS root to the ccTLD.)
All in all, I feel the strength of the assertion that ccTLDs derive from and are somehow a part of each sovreign nation. However, there is the competing theory that ccTLDs are merely database entries in Virginia in the USA, and their use and allocation may be placed under pretty much any conditions that ICANN, oops, IANA, choses to impose.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
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
|
