Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Before I would be willing to accept ANY change I would want to see a discussion as to if and how it would improve anything.  What I would like to see is a public trustee administering the internet and paying for that service out of revenues derived from the internet.  We really need an amendment to the Constitution in the USA to guarantee the right of citizens to the communications medium of the internet subject only to the constraints of technical realities.  We especially need protection for the rights of free communication and freedom from censorship, but also laws that prevent the use by governmental agencies of any information concerning individuals and groups obtained from monitoring internet use that is not the result of a court order.

Furtherance of these goals are the only real reason to support any change in internet governance.  Given the directions taken by so many governments towards control of the internet, I think it is imperative that any change be opposed until and unless these concerns are fully addressed.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Tue May 5th, 2009 at 07:35:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
A tangled web by any other name...

So, salient data point one is that the Commerce Department of the United States, a trusted friend in all things both specifically and generally, has a contract with a non-profit named ICANN which expires soon.

Just like the issue of the GPS system, I imagine that some feel that the control of the internet by the US is akin to watching a potential runaway nightmare unfold. Every nuance that might otherwise be innocent turns into a molehill which might be well founded. I do not insinuate by this that the US has claimed the same rights for shutting down the internet should war break out as it has of its GPS system (notwithstanding its DARPA roots.)

So, Europe wants some control. This is logical. They want less US control. Sounds logical too.

Perhaps though, you are insinuating that letting the contract expire, without assigning it to anyone, to test the theories of Anarchy...let's go for it. I will get out my old Proudhom and Bakunin and we can have a real go at this.

Finally, this excerpt from that wiki place
ICANN

On May 17, 2004, ICANN published a proposed budget for the year 2004-05. It included proposals to increase the openness and professionalism of its operations, and greatly increased its proposed spending from US $8.27m to $15.83m. The increase was to be funded by the introduction of new top-level domains, charges to domain registries, and a fee for some domain name registrations, renewals and transfers (initially USD 0.20 for all domains within a country-code top-level domain, and USD 0.25 for all others). The Council of European National Top Level Domain Registries (CENTR), which represents the Internet registries of 39 countries, rejected the increase, accusing ICANN of a lack of financial prudence and criticising what it describes as ICANN's "unrealistic political and operational targets". Despite the criticism, the registry agreement for the top-level domains .jobs and .travel includes a US $2 fee on every domain the licensed companies sell or renew.[5]

Along with the successful negotiations of the .travel and .jobs namespace, .mobi, and .cat are some of the new top-level domains introduced by ICANN. The introduction of the .eu Top Level Domain to the root in violation of RFC 1591[nb 1], and the introduction of .asia are developments to watch.

After an extensive build-up that saw speculation that the United Nations might signal a takeover of ICANN[6], followed by a negative reaction from the US government[7] and worries about a division of the internet[8] the World Summit on the Information Society in Tunisia in November 2005 agreed not to get involved in the day-to-day and technical operations of ICANN. However it also agreed to set up an international Internet Governance Forum, with a consultative role on the future governance of the Internet. ICANN's Government Advisory Committee is currently set up to provide advice to ICANN regarding public policy issues and has participation by many of the world's governments.



Never underestimate their intelligence, always underestimate their knowledge.

Frank Delaney ~ Ireland

by siegestate (siegestate or beyondwarispeace.com) on Wed May 6th, 2009 at 07:23:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have had a fond spot for Bakunin since I read the E. H. Carr biography ~ 1962, my second year in college.  I would probably get a lot more out of it today.  :-)

I agree that what to do next with ICANN is problematic.  I am generally not a fan of privatization nor of US hegemony, especially given how it has been exercised.  The only thing that has been a positive to date is that the tech community and interested companies in the USA have succeeded in fending off most heavy handed attempts at government intervention.  Posts about proposed regulation in Europe combined with what we have seen from China, Vietnam etc. and what we know about mid-east countries such as Saudi Arabia, Syria etc. do not leave me all warm and fuzzy about the prospects for international control either.  Any suggestions?

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Wed May 6th, 2009 at 10:41:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If I knew what I was talking about, I would first look for what would be the ideal situation, what we would imagine would be best given a perfect planet and perfect wonderful open and responsive governments around the globe (and beyond if those little critters weren't so dang'd obnoxious all the time.)

But I don't know the details of this. Probably the net is pretty immune to one group grabbing it, since there are so many interconnected repeaters built into the systems already.

I suspect that the only thing at this point is to keep ICANN but keep it on its toes. Make it absolutely open and much more responsive. I can only imagine that the US protection and influence is making them more clever then they need to be.

But, I am not an expert.

Never underestimate their intelligence, always underestimate their knowledge.

Frank Delaney ~ Ireland

by siegestate (siegestate or beyondwarispeace.com) on Wed May 6th, 2009 at 01:30:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series