Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 309
Netizens-Digest Sunday, June 20 1999 Volume 01 : Number 309
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] NSI Stalling Domain Transition (US)
[netz] PARODY: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=F4=BF=F6?= ICANN Theater =?iso-8859-1?Q?=F4=BF=F6?=
[netz] Deconstructing Dyson (fwd
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 00:53:18
From: John Walker <jwalker@networx.on.ca>
Subject: [netz] NSI Stalling Domain Transition (US)
Registrations for the On-line Learning Series of Courses are now
being accepted. All courses are delivered by e-mail, are two to
three weeks in duration and cost between $5.00 US and $25.00 US.
Information is available at:
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
Starting 1 July 1999
Introduction to the Internet and On-line Learning
Effective Use of E-Mail
Creating web pages with HTML Level 1
Creating web pages with HTML Level 2
Creating web pages with HTML Level 3 (Advanced)
How to Search the World Wide Web Level 1
How to Search the World Wide Web Level 2
Using Eudora Lite and Pro Level 1
Eudora Pro Level 2
Using Eudora Pro Level 3
Using Microsoft Outlook Express Level 1
Using Netscape Messenger Level 1
Using Netscape Messenger Level 2
Using Netscape Messenger Level 3
Using Netscape Messenger Level 4
Using Netscape Messenger Level 4 (a)
The following is an excerpt from the CSS Internet News. If you are
going to pass this along to other Netizens please ensure that the
complete message is forwarded with all attributes intact.
- --------------------
Dyson: NSI Stalling Domain Transition (US)
June 16, 1999
By Brian McWilliams
InternetNews.com Correspondent Business News Archives
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article/0,1087,3_138581,00.html
Esther Dyson, the acting chairperson of the Internet Corp. for
Assigned Names and Numbers, Tuesday accused Network Solutions of
"mudslinging" and trying to stall ICANN's attempts to privatize the
governance of the Internet and domain registration in particular.
Dyson made the comments in response to a June 11 letter from
consumer advocate Ralph Nader and James Love, head of the Consumer
Project on Technology. The pair wrote Dyson asking for more
information on the issues ICANN plans to address, such as whether it
will get involved in the issues of trademarks used in domains. They
also asked Dyson to clarify whether ICANN will levy any domain fees
and if so how they will be used.
Dyson Tuesday released a detailed response. In her reply to Nader,
Dyson defended ICANN's work so far and she accused Network Solutions
of trying to drum up opposition to ICANN from groups like Nader's
Consumer Project on Technology.
"The questions you ask are legitimate, and we have legitimate
answers to them. What is illegitimate is the motivation of some of
the people who keep asking the same questions without paying
attention to the answers."
In an interview with InternetNews, Dyson suggested that NSI is
trying to discredit ICANN so that it can hold on to its monopoly in
domain registrations.
"We would like to work with NSI. We believe in private enterprise
and have been trying to negotiate with them rather than slinging mud.
It is in their interest to delay things because as long as there are
delays, they can keep earning money. They are happy with the status
quo and don't need to form a real coalition," she said.
She goes on to accuse NSI of working through others who for
economic, philosophical or political reasons are unhappy with the way
the policies were formed.
"NSI's rhetoric is also quite inconsistent with its conduct. The
company operates under the cloak of nondisclosure agreements
covering not just technical and commercial information, but also the
experiences of ICANN-accredited registrars now attempting to open up
the domain-name registration business to competition.
Nader and CPT director James Love were unavailable for comment on
Dyson's letter, a copy of which will be available at ICANN's Web
site. Officials from NSI were also unavailable to respond to Dyson's
criticisms.
Dyson said she doesn't expect the letter to put all of Nader's
concerns to rest, but she hopes it will help him and other observers
understand the crux of ICANN's battle.
"I think it's going to help us start selling our case more clearly
and help people like Ralph Nader understand where truth and justice
really is," she said.
Links:
http://www.icann.org/
http://www.cptech.org/
http://www.icann.org/nader-questions.htm
- --------------
Also in this issue:
- - Unesco steps up fight against Internet paedophiles (UK)
Experts believe there are 23,000 paedophile Websites
The United Nations has given its support to a new think-tank aimed
at combating the misuse of the Internet by paedophile groups.
- - Canadians Will File Tax Returns Online (Canada)
Half of the 7 million Canadians who used software and
computer-generated paper returns to file their 1998 taxes will
receive an invitation from Revenue Canada, the government's tax
agency, to participate in a trial online-filing program.
- - NSI Stalling Domain Transition (US)
Esther Dyson, the acting chairperson of the Internet Corp. for
Assigned Names and Numbers, Tuesday accused Network Solutions of
"mudslinging" and trying to stall ICANN's attempts to privatize the
governance of the Internet and domain registration in particular.
- - FCC Opposes Local Cable Internet Rules (US)
CHICAGO (Reuters) - U.S. regulators are considering a range of
options to minimize the effect of a court decision two weeks ago
allowing local authorities to regulate cable Internet services, a top
official said Tuesday.
- - TurboLinux Plants Flag in RedHat Country (US)
On the surface, the partnership--an agreement to bundle IBM's DB2
Universal Database software and support package with the TurboLinux
distribution--seemed fairly routine. Aside from filling a major
application and service gap in the Linux jigsaw puzzle, the
announcement represented yet another example of Big Blue's growing
affinity for open-source software as an enterprise tool.
- - Report Ranks Top 20 Irish Web Sites (Ireland)
A new report from MediaLive ranks the top twenty Irish Web sites
that accept advertising, in terms of traffic, as reported and
submitted by the sites for ranking.
- - Making Your Site Worth Visiting (US)
You could lose important business, if your site doesn't have
compelling text, and never even know it. People don't read online:
they skim and scan until they find something interesting. And if
your copy is poorly written, uses grammar badly, or is just plain
dull, you probably won't get their attention or their business.
- - Writer uses e-mail to start movements (US)
Science-fiction writer and hacker expert Bruce Sterling long ago
realized that electronic mailing lists were the perfect guerrilla
tool. They're fast, cheap, below the radar of the powers that be --
and information disseminated that way replicates itself infinitely.
- - The Web reaches out to Gen Y (US)
(IDG) -- It's been called the largest consumer market since the baby
boomers and the first to be reared on the Web. This is Generation Y:
kids 5 to 20 years old for whom computers, digital appliances, and
the Internet are all second nature.
- - Can Girls Grab Geek Power? (US)
Geek girls may one day rule the world, or they may just be a great
marketing ploy. (John Ueland)
- - Lower costs spell mainland Net boom (China)
Cheaper PCs and Internet fees will help lift the number of mainland
Net users from 2.1 million last year to 6.7 million by the end of
this year, rising to 33 million in 2003, according to a report.
- - Ease of use is key feature of new Chinese systems (China)
Systems to input Chinese characters using a regular English keyboard
are moving to a new level of usability, with two new systems showing
improved ease of use.
- - Corel, Rebel.com Sponsor Ottawa Linux Symposium (Canada/AE)
Event will feature a number of prominent speakers from the Linux
community
- - New Lists and Journals
* NEW: K9Nutrition
* NEW: Human Sexuality Discussion List
* NEW: HA- Home Automation
On-line Learning Series of Courses
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker/course.htm
Member: Association for International Business
- -------------------------------
Excerpt from CSS Internet News (tm) ,-~~-.____
For subscription details email / | ' \
jwalker@hwcn.org with ( ) 0
SUBINFO CSSINEWS in the \_/-, ,----'
subject line. ==== //
/ \-'~; /~~~(O)
"On the Internet no one / __/~| / |
knows you're a dog" =( _____| (_________|
http://www.bestnet.org/~jwalker
- -------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 18:17:18 -0400
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
Subject: [netz] PARODY: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=F4=BF=F6?= ICANN Theater =?iso-8859-1?Q?=F4=BF=F6?=
PARODY: ô¿ö ICANN Theater ô¿ö
From: "P.A. Gantt" <pgantt@icx.net>
4:40 PM
Subject: [p_a_place] PARODY: ô¿ö ICANN Theaterô¿ö
ô¿ö PARODY: ICANN Theater ô¿ö
=============================
"...The continuing sparting match between ICANN
and its doubters added another pair Ralph Nader
and James Love
( Consumer Project on Technology,
o http://www.cptech.org ).
John Young has generously agreed to make available
copies of a letter from Ralph and James to Esther Dyson,
ICANN's Interim Chairman and Ms. Dyson's reply. However
the real bonus is an *anonymous parody of ICANN* and
the major players.
And now the curtain raises. Please give a warm hand
for the ICANN Theater Troupe.
o http://jya.com/icann-ed.htm
..."
~telecommreg-l~
- --
P.A. Gantt, mailto:pgantt@icx.net?subject=REPLY
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
P_A_Place is found here
http://www.egroups.com/group/p_a_place/
Visit the bottom of this page:
o http://user.icx.net/~pgantt
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 11:24:48 +0000
From: kerryo@ns.sympatico.ca (Kerry Miller)
Subject: [netz] Deconstructing Dyson (fwd
- ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 17:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Patrick Greenwell <patrick@cybernothing.org>
Subject: [IFWP] Letter to Ralph Nader and James Love
Note: If you are interested in endorsing this letter please
email your name and affiliation(if you wish) to: patrick@cybernothing.org
Ralph Nader
P.O. Box 19312
Washington, DC 20036
James Love
Consumer Project on Technology
P.O. Box 19367,
Washington, DC 20036
Dear Ralph and James:
I would like to take this opportunity to express my deep appreciation for
your letter to the ICANN board dated June 11. It is both heartening to see
that the ICANN board has chosen to respond to you, and disappointing that,
despite the enquiries of a number of individuals on similar issues, the
board has been completely non-responsive.
I am also writing to offer some perspective on the answers that Ms. Esther
Dyson has offered to you on behalf of the ICANN board. I do so as someone
who has been an active participant in this arena for over two years, as a
past board member and representatitve of the Internet Service Providers
Consortium(ISP/C), as a steering committee member of the Internation Forum
on the White Paper (IFWP) and as a past employee of two different
prospective domain name registrars. While I serve in none of these
capacities at present, I have chosen to remain involved in these issues
out of personal interest and my belief that what occurs will greatly
affect the Internet, its users, and their right to be represented in the
decisions that affect them.
Since the ICANN board -- by unjustifiably raising the specter of paid NSI
agents acting as saboteurs -- has taken the unfortunate tack of attempting
to divert attention from the questions you have asked, I feel it prudent
to offer my position with regards to NSI lest I be mistaken for one of
these boogymen. I have been a long-time critic of NSI, having been a
victim of their fatally flawed domain dispute policy. Being even further
upset by what I believe to have been nothing less than the hijacking of
the former Internic site, I created an alternative site with similar
functionality: http://209.133.38.12. I have never been, nor am I now, the
recipient of any item of value from Network Solutions. Nothing would
please me more than to see an end to the NSI monopoly in the
.com/.net/.org registries, and a level playing-field for all would-be
competitors.
1. ICANN and the White Paper
In her response, Ms. Dyson states "The initial board is following the
guidelines set forth in the United States Government's policy paper of
last June (the White Paper)..."
A copy of the White Paper may be obtained at:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/6_5_98dns.htm
I encourage you to retrieve a copy and review it for yourselves.
There are a number of very significant areas where the Interim board is
indeed not following the letter and/or the spirit of the White Paper:
a) Representation of Internet users on the ICANN Board
The White Paper:
"The Board of Directors for the new corporation should be balanced to
equitably represent the interests of IP number registries, domain name
registries, domain name registrars, the technical community, Internet
service providers (ISPs), and Internet users (commercial, not-for-profit,
and individuals) from around the world. Since these constituencies are
international, we would expect the board of directors to be broadly
representative of the global Internet community."
ICANN:
There are no members serving specifically to represent the interests of
Internet service providers, or individual Internet users on the current
board. One board member, Jun Murai, accounts for the sum of board
representation in the areas of IP number registries, domain name
registries, domain name registrars, and is the only board member with
discernable experience and participation within the Internet technical
community. Linda Wilson, as President of Radcliffe College apparently
represents not-for-profit organizations.
Thus, out of eight groups that were to be equally represented, there is a
single board member to represent four of these groups, with Ms. Wilson
representing one other. This leaves three other groups completely
unrepresented by the present board. As such, the current board objectively
fails to meet the representation criteria outlined in the White Paper.
It is also perplexing that an organization -- which is ostensibly charged
with largely technical management duties in the areas of domain names, IP
address and protocols -- would have on its board so few persons with
actual operational expertise in these areas.
b) The "Interim" Board vs. "Initial" Board
The White Paper:
" As outlined in appropriate organizational documents, (Charter, Bylaws,
etc.) the new corporation should:
1) appoint, on an interim basis, an initial Board of Directors (an
Interim Board) consisting of individuals representing the functional
and geographic diversity of the Internet community. The Interim Board
would likely need access to legal counsel with expertise in corporate
law, competition law, intellectual property law, and emerging
Internet law. The Interim Board could serve for a fixed period, until
the Board of Directors is elected and installed, and we anticipate
that members of the Interim Board would not themselves serve on the
Board of Directors of the new corporation for a fixed period
thereafter."
ICANN:
Ms. Dyson in her response offers:
" The White Paper calls for the consensus entity that became ICANN to
'appoint, on an interim basis, an initial Board of Directors (an Interim
Board)' (emphasis in original]. This 'initial' Board was to serve until
it established "a system of electing a Board of Directors." Thus, the
terms "initial" and "interim" were clearly synonymous in the White Paper."
I believe if you examine the text of the White Paper, you will learn that
- - -- Ms. Dyson's attempted juxtaposition of "interim" with "initial"
nonwithstanding -- no such synonymity exists.
It is also important to note that the details of the selection of the
current unelected Interim board -- which ostensibly resulted from the
"bottom-up" decision-making process that is the hallmark of the Internet -
- -- are extremely hazy at best. I invite you to ask the board what
criteria was employed in selecting these particular board members to serve
as the representatives of the Internet Community, and who was doing the
selecting. It is my sincere hope that you may be able to elicit a simple,
honest and straightforward response to these questions, when the rest of
the Internet community has been unable to.
c) Openness and transparency
The White Paper:
" The new corporation's processes should be fair, open and
pro-competitive, protecting against capture by a narrow group of
stakeholders. Typically this means that decision-making processes should
be sound and transparent; the basis for corporate decisions should be
recorded and made publicly available."
ICANN:
Despite continued calls for transparency mechanisms such as open board
meetings, the current ICANN board has instead choosen to operate behind
closed doors. Indeed, other organizations within the ICANN structure --
such as the Names Council, and the Government Advisory Council -- have
adopted similar closed-door policies in conducting their affairs. The
boards' refusal to conduct meetings in the open, where they are subject to
public review, has created an unfortunate precedent that has become the
status quo within ICANN.
If you review what scant information that does exist, namely the
Board meeting minutes located at:
http://www.icann.org/minutes/notes-minutes.html
I think you will find that there is little in the way of an objective
basis for or explanation of the vast majority of decisions being made.
d) "Cybersquatting" and the WIPO report
The White Paper:
" The U.S. Government will seek international support to call upon the
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to initiate a balanced
and transparent process, which includes the participation of trademark
holders and members of the Internet community who are not trademark
holders, to (1) develop recommendations for a uniform approach to
resolving trademark/domain name disputes involving cyberpiracy (as
opposed to conflicts between trademark holders with legitimate competing
rights), (2) recommend a process for protecting famous trademarks in the
generic top level domains..."
in addition:
" Further, it should be clear that whatever dispute resolution mechanism
is put in place by the new corporation, that mechanism should be directed
toward disputes about cybersquatting and cyberpiracy and not to settling
the disputes between two parties with legitimate competing interests in a
particular mark. Where legitimate competing rights are concerned, disputes
are rightly settled in an appropriate court."
ICANN:
Completely ignoring the very clearly articulated guidelines above, the
ICANN board has instead chosen to embark on a much more ambitious path,
stating in their May 27th press release located at
http://www.icann.org/berlin/berlin-press-rel.htm: "The Initial Board noted
that the scope of this policy should be wider than the cases of abusive
registration with which the WIPO report deals, and ultimately cover all
commercial dispute issues linked to Domain Name registrations."
This statement alone, should remove any possible misperception
that ICANN is not attempting to operate in a governance role. ICANN,
entirely disregarding its mandate, would offer itself the authority to
decide the manner and means by which a persons' property may be
confiscated in ALL commercial disputes linked to Domain Name registrations
without the benefit of a court of appropriate jurisdiction.
The ICANN board also passed a resolution in Berlin regarding uniform
dispute resolution:
"FURTHER RESOLVED (Resolution 99.43), the ICANN Board endorses the
principle that a uniform dispute resolution policy should be adopted for
Registrars in the .com, .net, and .org Top-Level Domains (TLDs);"
In taking this action against the .com, .net, and .org registry, ICANN has
singled out NSI and their customers for this treatment. There are over 240
TLDs in existence, several of which are direct competitors of NSI. How is
the goal of a level-playing field aided by the implementation of a
"uniform" dispute policy that is only applicable to some TLDs and not
others? Why is an organization claiming that it exists for "technical
coordination" purposes in the business of MANDATING dispute policies at
all?
e) Funding
The White Paper:
" Once established, the new corporation could be funded by domain name
registries, regional IP registries, or other entities identified by the
Board."
ICANN:
Eschewing any of the above-mentioned groups as funding sources, ICANN
instead has chosen to fund itself by assessing a $1 per domain "tax" on
each domain name.
If there is any question as to whether imposition of such a fee is a
"tax," I welcome you to examine the finding of the court in the case
"William Thomas, et al vs. Network Solutions", a decision that is located
at http://www.aira.org.
While it is certainly understandable that a funding mechanism for ICANN is
necessary, it is completely improper that a "tax" be imposed without the
representation of those being taxed -- in this case, the individual domain
name owner. In fact, I believe a fairly well known revolution occurred
with the concept of "no taxation without representation" as one of its
founding principles.
That an unelected board is in the business of imposing taxes on an
unrepresented constituency -- which would be forced to be the primary
source of funding for this organization -- should offer some indication of
the gravity of the situation that faces us all.
2. ICANN and its bylaws
a) The "Initial" Board of ICANN
ICANN bylaws:
Article V: Section 1 of the ICANN bylaws state:
" The initial Board of Directors of the Corporation ("Initial Board")
shall consist of [a] nine At Large members, [b] the President (when
appointed) and [c] those Directors that have been selected in accordance
with these bylaws by any Supporting Organization(s) that exists under
Section 3(a) of Article VI during the term of any of such At Large
members. The At Large members of the Initial Board shall serve until
September 30, 1999, unless by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of all the members
of the Board that term is extended."
ICANN in practice:
Currently, there are only the at-large members of the ICANN board. Half of
the "Initial" board has not been seated as of yet. It would seem for the
purposes of the bylaws, that there exists no "Initial" board of ICANN at
present, yet the board members present are already engaging in substantive
policy, acting as if the "initial" board was properly constituted.
The term of the interim board members that are seated is to expire within
three months, yet, while comfortable in taking aggresive policy actions in
other areas, the board has been unable or unwilling to establish a
membership that is to elect 9 members.
b) The structure of and representation of Internet users within the ICANN
Supporting Organizations
ICANN bylaws
The ICANN bylaws state that the initial constituencies of the Domain Name
Supporting Organization would be comprised of the following:
" 1. ccTLD registries;
2. commercial and business entities;
3. gTLD registries;
4. ISP and connectivity providers;
5. non-commercial domain name holders;
6. registrars; and
7. trademark, other intellectual property and anti-counterfeiting
interests."
[note: ccTLD stands for "Country Code Top Level Domain." gTLD stands for
"Generic Top Level Domain"]
Further:
"(c) Members of each Constituency shall select three individuals to
represent that Constituency on the NC, no two of which may be, except with
the consent of the Board, citizens of countries in the same Geographic
Region, as defined in Article V, Section 6. Nominations within each
Constituency may be made by any member of the Constituency, but no such
member may make more than one nomination in any single Constituency;
provided that this limitation shall not apply to any Constituency with
less than three members."
ICANN in practice
One of the most contentious areas in the formation of ICANN has been the
composition of the "Domain Name Supporting Organization" (DNSO) within
ICANN. The DNSO's role is to develop substantive policy recommendations on
any domain-name related issues, including but not limited to domain name
conflicts, and the addition of top level domains to the root servers. The
DNSO would also select the Names Council, which would be charged with
delivery of such policy, as well as selection of three ICANN board
members.
In this scheme, individual domain name holders are offered 3 out of a
possible 21 seats on the Name Council. The other 18 would go to
businesses, and/or their representatives. This presents a situation where
the DNSO is dominated by business interests. The individual domain name
owner, the one being forced to bear the costs of funding ICANN, will
*never* have adequate and/or equal representation within the ICANN
structure.
The ICANN board has rejected all proposals by which an individual may
fully participate in the DNSO. In the nine months since its formation, the
ICANN board has failed to establish a general membership, a membership
that would elect their successors. This, despite the hard work of the
membership committee in furnishing the ICANN board with a completed report
on membership.
It is also of great import to be aware that there is no substitute for
physical presence within ICANN. Although the medium that ICANN would
govern requires no specific physical presence, allowing for instantaneous
communication worldwide, there has been no attempt to offer physically
distant constituents voting rights.
At the last meeting of ICANN, held in Berlin, several of the Supporting
Organization constituencies were recognized by the ICANN Board.
Immediately thereafter, votes were taken by members of those
constituencies physically present to elect Name Council members. No
opportunity was afforded those not physically present to vote for their
representatives. Thus, those not physically present are inadequately, and
in some cases completely unrepresented, although persons have been elected
to fill spaces. In truth, the Names Council, while not even fully
constituted, has begun making substantive decisions regarding the DNSO.
In its admirable quest to remain truly international, ICANN has embarked
on a permanent world tour, holding meetings in different countries. While
they are to be commended for this commitment to diversity, it has the
unfortunate side effect of leaving anyone -- without the significant time
and funding necessary to travel the globe -- completely unrepresented at
ICANN meetings. Needless to say, the group that is most impacted by this
lack of representation consists of the individual domain name owners.
c) ICANN's adherence to its bylaws
ICANN in practice
To date, ICANN has unquestionably violated its own bylaws directly at
least two times:
a) Duly appointed Name Council representatives were forcibly ejected
from a meeting.
In accordance with the aforementioned bylaws, NSI (the only member of
the gTLD constituency,) named three individuals to the Names Council:
Don Telage, a NSI employee; Richard Sexton, a prospective gTLD
registry; and Joop Teernstra, a representative of the an organization
called the "Individual Domain Name Owners Constituency." However, in
the next Name Council meeting on June 11th, Javier Sola, a Names
Council member, stating that he was operating at the instruction of
the ICANN board, and with ICANN Interim CEO Mike Roberts and ICANN
attorney Joe Simms present, ejected Joop, Richard, and David Johnson,
counsel for NSI from the Names Council teleconference. Further, Don
Telage, Senior Vice President, Internet Relations and Special
Projects of NSI, was relegated to "observer" status. The Names
Council members present voted to close the meeting, and as such a
member of the press was denied access to the call. Now that the
minutes are available, it is evident that the topic of discussion was
the WIPO report, something of vast public import.
ICANN bylaws
"(g) No more than one officer, director or employee of a corporation
or other organization (including its subsidiaries and affiliates)
shall serve on the NC at any given time. Service as a member of the
NC shall not disqualify a person from being selected by the DNSO as
one of the Directors of the Corporation it is entitled to select. "
ICANN practice
Currently, two MCI-WorldCom employees, Theresa Swinehart and Susan
Anthony, have been elected and are currently serving on the Names
Council in violation of this bylaw.
3. ICANN: A monopoly to dwarf NSI
Throughout Ms. Dyson's response, she constantly referred to NSI as being a
monopoly, casting ICANN as being a fearless monopoly-buster. What Ms.
Dyson fails to impart is that in breaking the NSI monopoly ICANN stands to
become a monopoly of far greater power and control than NSI, with
regulatory and governance ambitions that far exceed those of NSI.
Currently, NSI controls only the domain name registry for .com, .net, and
.org domain names. ICANN would control much more:
a) ICANN will control the assignment of Protocol parameters for
the entire Internet. Protocol addresses and names that are
necessary in order to offer new services on the Internet.
b) ICANN will control IP address allocation for the entire Internet.
This has not been a high-visibility discussion; however, it is
likely to be of much greater import to the Internet than domain
names. One of IANA's functions was to allocate address space to
the RIRs(Regional Internet Registries) so that they may then in
turn allocate address space to ISPs and end-users.
c) Currently, there are over 240 TLDs, with the likelyhood that
this number will expand in the future. ICANN will effectively
control the registries of all TLDs everywhere, and force every
prospective registry to enter into contracts by which ICANN will
dictate their ability to offer services, and the means by which
they may do so. In fact, there are demands from the Government
Advisory Council that ICANN enable governments to take ccTLDs
from their current maintainers. This is a right they do not have
today, and would represent a fundamental shift in long-standing
policy regarding ccTLDs.
d) Along with ICANN controlling all registries, all prospective
registrars in the ICANN regime are forced to sign
contracts with ICANN in order to do business as a registrar.
While there are no registry contracts as of yet, the registrar contract
which prospective registrars are forced to sign does exist
(http://www.icann.org/ra-agreement-051299.html) and:
o Specifies what data property rights a registrar can claim in the
information collected
o Mandates that registrars may only offer registrations for a fixed time
period
o Forces the domain name holder "to agree to suspension,
cancellation, or transfer of their domain name by ANY ICANN
registry or registrar administrator approved by an ICANN-adopted
policy (1) to correct mistakes by Registrar or the registry
administrator in registering the name or (2) for the resolution
of disputes concerning the SLD name."
o Allows ICANN to remove "certification" from a registrar, likely
rendering them unable to do business.
I ask you, what organization chartered for merely "technical coordination"
purposes has such broad powers as to specify what property rights a
business can claim in data, force an individual or business to submit to
the confiscation of their property at the whim of whatever undefined
process that organization may choose to undertake at any time, or put a
company out of business entirely?
A citizen has more rights when an agency violates its own rules of
procedure, but ICANN -- since it is nominally "private"--is not bound by
the rules of Due Process.
In purchasing a single share of common stock in NSI, any individual may
obtain greater legal rights to speak and to obtain information regarding
NSI, the monopoly, than one can obtain in ICANN, a non-profit chartered to
be open, transparent, and representative of the Internet community.
NSI, the monopoly, is over. This is spelled out in the White Paper, as
well as Amendment 11 of the Cooperative Agreement between NSI and the
Department of Commerce, available at:
http://www.networksolutions.com/nsf/agreement/amendment11.html
We have the Department of Commerce to thank for this, not ICANN. All that
ICANN has done in this area is to produce a heavy-handed registrar
agreement contract, collect fees from prospective registrars, and offer
the names of five prospective registrars, lacking any publicly known
objective criteria for their selection over other, equally qualified
candidates.
Finally, what Ms. Dyson has castigated NSI for is acting like a business.
As you are well aware, licensing fees and non-disclosure agreements are
very much standard within the business world. It borders on the absurd to
criticize a for-profit business for acting like a for-profit business. It
is not NSI's responsibility to be open, transparent, and representative.
Given ICANN's charter, and potential power ICANN will wield, it is however
very much ICANNs responsibility to adhere to the principles of openness,
transparency, representation, and fairness. I can find no fault with NSI
demanding that a governance organization that is poised to destroy their
business adhere to the concepts of fair and non-discriminatory treatment.
4. CONCLUSION
I would like to close in part by quoting Ms. Dyson:
" Indeed, I hope that they may persuade you to join us in our fight to
remove monopoly from the business of registering domain names and help
keep the Net free for small businesses and individuals to use as they
see fit."
I would however ask you to consider that the fight is rightly to
help prevent a much larger monopoly from occuring, one that would span not
only domain names, but has the potential to fundamentally affect Internet
users everywhere.
Left unfettered, the decisions that ICANN are making will amount to
privately imposed law, existing in every nation on earth, without the
benefit of the review or enactment by a representative legislative body in
*any* of these nations.
It is imperative that voices such as yours, voices known for being
champions of the 'little guy', are involved in this process. Please, help
to ensure that the Internet remains free from the global regulatory and
taxation scheme that ICANN is attempting to force upon us. The Internet
community needs your continued interest and participation in these issues.
The full text of this letter may also be found at:
http://stealthgeeks.net/nader.html. I would welcome the opportunity to
speak futher with you.
Thank You
Patrick Greenwell
(408) 863-6617
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #309
******************************
