Posted on 14-6-2002

ICANN Can't?
by Alan Marston

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is the body
setup in 1998 by the the country that originated the Internet, the USA,
with powers in the US to administer the domains that don't have a country
code, eg. .com and .net and .org and etc. Most people associate these sorts
of domains not with the USA, but as being `global'. The US is in a very
powerful position in respect of Internet maintenance and growth and control
and the US Government intends to keep it that way. However, ICANN is
proving to be a wild card that won't easily give in to direct US Government
control.

U.S. lawmakers said on Wednesday that they would step up oversight of the
nonprofit group that oversees the Internet's domain-name system, but
stopped short of saying the United States should run the controversial body
directly - though this is a real possibility. Several senators and a Bush
administration official said ICANN would have to change the way it operates
if it wants to continue to oversee the system that allows Internet users to
navigate using easy-to-remember domain names like 'www.example.com.' and of
late a whole raft of new top level domain names like .biz, .tv, .name - dot
dot dot ... But Montana Republican Sen. Conrad Burns, who two days before
called for the United States to exert more direct control if ICANN did not
clean up its act, said the Department of Commerce should renew ICANN's
contract when it expires in September. ``My feeling right now is the
(contract) should be extended,'' the Montana Republican said. ``There are
some things that we have to iron out.'' A Commerce Department official
declined to say whether or not ICANN would win a contract extension, but
said she stood behind ICANN's approach. Though reforms are needed, ``the
department continues to be supportive of the ICANN model,'' Assistant
Secretary Nancy Victory told the Senate science, technology and space
subcommittee.

ICANN has been a magnet for controversy since it was created in 1998 to
assume control of the domain-name system from the U.S. government.
Domain-name businesses complain that ICANN moves too slowly and imposes too
many restrictions, while grass-roots ``cyber-citizens'' complain that their
voices are not heard. Charges that the nonprofit organization operates in
an opaque and arbitrary manner come from all quarters. ICANN has not yet
won full control of the domain-name system because it has not met a number
of requirements laid out in the original contract, such as establishing
formal agreements with volunteers who run much of the system. A
congressional investigator told the Senate that ICANN was unlikely to meet
those requirements any time soon, and said the Commerce Department needed
to assert a firmer hand, political-speak for `tow the line or else'.

ICANN President M. Stuart Lynn touted the group's accomplishments, noting
that it has encouraged competition among domain-name sellers, bringing down
prices for a one-year registration from $50 to $10. The group itself has
recognized the need for reform, Lynn said, and will take up a comprehensive
restructuring proposal when it next meets in Romania at the end of the month.

Critics told the committee that any reorganization should strictly limit
ICANN's capabilities so that it does not try to regulate Internet content,
or get into other areas such as consumer protection which it was not
designed to handle. ICANN's decision to abandon direct elections will also
mean that consumer and users interests will not be represented, said Alan
Davidson, an associate director at the Center for Democracy and Technology.