[Media Caucus] A battle for the soul of the Internet

[Tracey Naughton]

A battle for the soul of the Internet

     By Elliot Noss, Special to ZDNet

     Published on ZDNet News: June 3, 2005, 5:19 AM PT

     With little fanfare, there is a battle going on for the soul of the
     Internet. The United Nations and the [2]ITU (International
     Communications Union) are trying to wrest control of domain
names, the
     DNS and IP addresses from [3]ICANN (Internet Corporation for
Assigned
     Names and Numbers). This battle manifests itself through the
     U.N.-created [4]World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) and the
     ITU-lead [5]Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG).

     While the Internet is essentially a series of protocols adhered
to by
     common consent, it relies on a single authoritative root at its
core.
     This is what assures Internet users who type "zdnet.com" into their
     browsers that they end up where they thought they should.
Anything but
     uniqueness with this vital resource would result in collision and
     confusion. The same is true for e-mail. Unless senders are certain
     that there is only one unique identifier for a recipient, they
cannot
     use e-mail with confidence.

     Both the U.N. and the ITU have their reasons for trying to wrest
     control of these vital resources from ICANN. For the U.N., ICANN
     represents a body that transcends the nation-state structure, and
     could become a model for similar efforts covering subject matter
most
     appropriately dealt with at a global level. For the ITU, gaining
     control of core Internet resources represents an opportunity to put
     the Internet-genie back in the bottle and gain a greater measure of
     relevance in the IP networking world. The ITU doesn't see itself as
     merely an overseer of the old circuit-switched networks, which it
     presides over today, but as the overseer of all networks, including
     the Internet.

     While ICANN has its flaws, it also possesses important, unique
     characteristics. Two are worthy of special note. First, ICANN's form
     of governance explicitly includes policy, technical, business and
user
     interests under one roof. Each interest group has a formal role and
     voice in both policy-making and governance. Each has a stake in the
     proceedings, and each is an important part of the system. (Yes,
users'
     voices need be heard more, and as an active participant in the ICANN
     process and member of the 2005 ICANN Nominating Committee I will
     continue to work toward that goal). Having these combined interests
     explicitly inside the process avoids some of the perversions that we
     have seen in other forms of governance, campaign finance being
perhaps
     the starkest example.

     Second, ICANN is a truly global organization. It is global in the
     sense that individuals involved represent one of the above-mentioned
     interests, but not national governments. This is an important
concept
     in that the Internet is truly a global resource, but it is this
unique
     element that creates the greatest challenge. We have no model for
     managing a global resource of this nature. There are numerous models
     for managing international resources, resources being managed
between
     nations, but that is not what the Internet is. In this regard, ICANN
     mirrors the Internet in that it works by "rough consensus." The
checks
     and balances are systemic. This is what has allowed the price of
     domain names to drop by 50- to 75 percent over the last five years
     while service levels have increased dramatically. This is what has
     allowed the [6]Uniform Dispute Resolution Process (UDRP) to
eliminate
     cybersquatting of trademarks.

     The U.N.'s WSIS contains 40 delegates, including members from Cuba,
     China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Tunisia, Pakistan, Syria,
Russia
     and Egypt. If the U.N. controlled domain names and IP addresses, the
     ability of countries to censor the Internet would be greatly
enhanced,
     as well as the ability to tax or impose other regulatory burdens on
     these resources in order to fund unrelated projects of any kind.
     In fact, if the U.N. and the ITU were successful, it is not
difficult
     to envision a Balkanization of the Internet as whole portions of the
     Internet decide they did not want to rely on the U.N. and the ITU
for
     their single authoritative root. If that Balkanization were to take
     place, the damage to the global economy would be incalculable.
     In addition, these Internet governance positions would not be plum
     U.N. postings. We could expect to see the likes of Internet pioneer
     Vint Cerf replaced by some dictator's wife's third cousin.

     The U.N./ITU put forward two main arguments for replacing ICANN.
They
     claim that it's necessary to wrest control of the Internet from the
     United States and that ICANN is a private organization that is
     beholden to no one and that represents no one.
     To be clear, ICANN is a not-for-profit California corporation that
     nominally reports to the US Department of Commerce and operates
under
     a memorandum of understanding with the agency that is reviewed and
     renewed in six-month intervals.

     Despite this, ICANN is not American--it is global. There are three
     Americans on a 15-person board of directors. There are six Americans
     on the 22-person generic names-supporting organization (GNSO)
council,
     the main policy-making body. Two Americans are on the 10-person
     at-large advisory council (ALAC). There has not been a meeting in
the
     US since November 2001, and the earliest possibility of a US meeting
     is in June 2007, a 17-meeting gap (the last North American
meeting was
     in Montreal in June 2003, and the next is in Vancouver in December).

     As for it being representative, ICANN has always had one
prerequisite
     for involvement--a willingness to take the time and effort to
     participate. There is active representation from Internet
communities
     from around the world. The level of participation, the quality of
     participation and the output of the process have steadily improved
     over ICANN's history. Neither the U.N. nor the ITU can make any of
     these claims. Participation in their processes require a position in
     or through a national government or a Telco monopoly, neither of
which
     are known for their deep appreciation and understanding of the
     Internet.

     There is no doubt that both the U.N. and the ITU are much more adept
     at politics than either ICANN staff or the vast majority of
     participants in the ICANN process. That makes the threat here all
the
     more real.

     It is important to remember that we all rely on the rich ecosystem
     that is the free Internet. We are all beneficiaries of the
innovation
     it spawns, the information it provides and the interaction it
     supports. We cannot take this for granted.

     Companies that rely on a free Internet--and there are few technology
     companies that don't--need to become active in the ICANN process
     through the [7]Business or ISP Constituencies; other institutions
and
     not-for-profits through the [8]non-commercial constituency.
Companies,
     institutions and individuals from around the world who have
access to
     their governments' decision makers need to let them know that the
     Internet needs to stay free and that supporting ICANN supports that
     principle. Individuals who care about the future of the Internet and
     believe they can contribute to creating a better ICANN and
preserving
     a freer Internet should think about the ICANN nominating committee's
     call for [9]Statements of Interest, which seeks qualified candidates
     to help the organization move forward.

     The Internet has contributed more to freedom, education and
innovation
     than any other advance of the last number of decades. It deserves to
     be protected from the people and the institutions that do not
share an
     appreciation for preserving the values upon which the Internet was
     founded.

     Elliot Noss is president and CEO of [10]Tucows, an Internet services
     company that provides back office solutions and wholesale Internet
     services to a global network of more than 6,000 service providers.
     Tucows is a domain name registrar and both participates in the ICANN
     process and benefits from it. Noss is a member of the 2005 ICANN
     Nominating Committee.


References

     1. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5730589.html
     2. http://www.itu.int/home/
     3. http://www.icann.org/
     4. http://www.itu.int/wsis/
     5. http://www.wgig.org/
     6. http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrp.htm
     7. http://gnso.icann.org/commercial-and-business/
     8. http://gnso.icann.org/non-commercial/
     9. http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-29apr05.htm
    10. http://resellers.tucows.com/about/





Tracey Naughton
NYAKA
Communication for Development Consultant
201 Somerset Hall
239 Oxford Road
Illovo     2196
South Africa

landline & fax:	+27 (0) 11 880 5030
cell / mobile:	+27 (0) 82 821 1771
email:		tracey at traceynaughton.com
skype:		tracey_naughton