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)

    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    VeriSign, Euro Registires Want ICANN Scaled Back | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 42 comments | 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.
    Then What? Re: VeriSign, Euro Registires
    by Anonymous on Friday August 02 2002, @04:53AM (#8305)
    Yes, let's hear it for warped language.

    Lest we forget, the terms of this particular debate over Network Solutions' right to "innovate" under protection of a government-granted monopoly predate ICANN's existence. The war over the form the market for domain names should take began roughly with NSI's decision to charge money for domain names, based on their (understandable) inability to service their USG cooperative agreement under the funding provided. The free-for-all that followed made it impossible for the old IANA to function; a few University staff funded under a research contract did not have the resources to cope with the onslaught of lawyers and bureaucrats that came calling.

    The people who wanted things the way they are now aren't speaking up but that doesn't mean they aren't out there. For example, there were loud, persistent voices among intellectual property interests two years ago (and four years ago for that matter) actively opposing *any* expansion of the gTLD namespace.

    A handful of new TLDs, trying out a variety of business and operational models, is better than what we had then. $6 a name to NSI per year and retail prices as low as $8.95 pricing is better than $35. Choices in who provides your domain name customer service in spite of the fact a zone file is a natural monopoly is better than having a fully-integrated, impenetrable monopoly all the way down.

    The persistent tendency to blame all actual or possible problems throughout the history of the domain name system on "ICANN and Co." is false, misleading, and unworthy of serious debate. Anyone who actually believes that none of the other participants-- some of whose desires and beliefs are mutually incompatible-- have had a role in creating the current confusion should step out of the conversation until they're ready to stop jerking their knees in conditioned, simpleminded hatred and examine the facts.

    Here's an exercise for beginners: the fact that various ccTLDs and Verisign can agree on disliking ICANN doesn't mean they could agree on what ICANN *should* be.

    Step 1: notice that the CENTR statement asks for ICANN to assume an educational and operational coordinating role it doesn't currently have. Ask yourself how likely it is that Verisign wants ICANN establishing "best current practices" for Verisign's operations. Sure, they both want ICANN to be different....and their views of what it should be may well be incompatible.

    Despising "ICANN and Co" may be comforting, but it solves nothing.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Then What? Re: VeriSign, Euro Registires by Anonymous
    Then What? Re: VeriSign, Euro Registires
    by RFassett on Friday August 02 2002, @05:32AM (#8307)
    User #3226 Info | http://www.enum.info
    for me, this has NEVER been about despising ICANN & Co. It has been about it influencing and fostering market place competition consistent with various goals of the White Paper which ICANN won the bid rights to. For it to set proper and publicly definable barriers to entry based upon infrastructure requirements, minimum financial resources, and technical competency. The removal of artificial constraints as much as can be and where it cannot, fully documented as to why (such as for reasons of "stability" so often cited in lieu of). And to then let the market place take over.

    Advocating for ICANN to move towards this direction (some call reducing its powers) is actually advocating for ICANN to succeed as the entity it was chosen to be, hopefully based in sound democratic principles. This is obviously open to subjective interpretation. But, this is certainly the way I feel about it. I have said before that I do not think it is the "processes" that have been the problem as much as the people behind - or have captured - these processes towards altering the spirit for which they were designed. The fact original board members still are in place only fuels certain outrage in this regard whether justified or otherwise. The fact the reform proposal maintains this as the status quo but eliminates the direct election mechanism brings further outrage. But advocating changes where competition is a core and primary objective - with limited ICANN regulatory influence - should not be confused with despising the need for an ICANN entity. It is actually the other way around and some view this as consistent with what the White Paper called for and ICANN won the bid rights to.
    [ 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