ICANN Board Members Squat

Professor Froomkin has written a strong criticism of the ICANN initial board, which has extended its unelected one-year term to an astonishing four years, with no end in sight. According to ICANN's current bylaws, those board members are serving a life term - their terms never expire. I strongly urge Slashdot readers in California to make time to attend ICANN's next meeting in November.

Comments

Re:Why...oh why....

[Shotgun]

This is actually looking more and more doable as time goes on.

You still missed the main point of my post. After you have done it, what do you have? You've now picked another ruler.

For those who have read Animal Farm, you've traded the humans for the pigs. Are you any better off? Would it not be easier to force the humans to act correctly in the first place. Someone must rule, and without checks and balances they will rule in their own interest. Creating another system without installing the checks and balances is a waste of time at best and most likely counter-productive.

Recall board members

[Vassily Overveight]

I haven't read the bylaws of the ICANN, but presumably there's a procedure for the membership to recall a board member before his/her term is up. My suggestion is that members do just that to all of these people (or at least the ones who voted for the term extension). Otherwise, before you know it this bunch is going to start voting themselves pensions.

venice beach is blocks away ..

[aberoham]

If anyone has the time but not the cash to blow on the Marina Marriot, Venice Beach and all of it's cheap accomodations are just a few blocks from the Marina.

(I can see the hotel and ICANN's building from my apt, which is in venice, ca...)

venice cotel

venice beach hostel

--ai

Re:Screw This

[King of the World]

They control the trickle of DNS, so pull the carpet out from under them.

The best alternative i've seen OpenNIC's openly open OpenDNS.

Is there any technical reason why DNS servers (probably provided by your ISP) can't add OpenDNSs details too?

The flaws in ICANN's foundation are proving fatal

[trims]

I was one of the optimists when ICANN was first founded. Yeah, sure there were some problems, but surely we could work past them in good faith to get a fair, equitable system which would straighten out the DNS mess.

I'm wrong. I admit it. Kick me.

ICANN is fundamentally flawed, and the flaws aren't fixable. Time to de-charter ICANN and do it right from the beginning.

The only way we can get an ICANN-like organization to really work is to make sure it has some reasonable fascimilie of these characteristics:

• Final Authority over Domain Disputes Worldwide - realistically, about the only way to do this is to get an international treaty together which designates the new org as the final legal arbiter of all domain disputes. This is by far the hardest thing to do, but it's really essential to make it work.
• A clear, concise, and equitable Dispute Policy - the new organization needs to have a very clearly spelled outdispute policy. It must include provisions which allow small parties to contest on an equal footing as large ones. And it need to have the infrastructure put in place to resolve these disputes (a "court system" if you may).
• Perpetual Non-profit Status. Not just not-for-profit, but the org must be a true public trust. Require that all board meetings be public, announced at least 6 months in advance, and that there may be no additions to the adjenda within 2 months of a meeting. Personally, I would require a 2/3 majority for any policy change, and NO changes to the bylaws. Bylaw changes should only be allowed via a public election.
• The Ability to Levy Fees for Domain Registration - in order to remain free of undue outside monetary influence, the new Org has to be able to raise money for operations. The treaty mentioned above needs to give the org the right to collect fees for operational expenses. Probably the most equitable way to do this is require that all designated Registrars pay something like $1/domain/year. This needs to be legally enforcable, so that Registrars refusing to pay (like NSI) can be cut off at the knees.
• A Wholely Member-Elected Board of Directors - period, no argument, no appointments. I would go for 2 year, non-consecutive terms (that is, you can run again after a term on the board, but you have to wait 2 years before doing so).
• A Reasonable Election Process, which balances regional representation and attempts to stop vote-stacking. By this I mean that I want to avoid the problem of highly-motivated small groups from being able to determine the entire representation of a region. Personally, I think it would be reasonable to have 3 Directors from each region. As a voter, you are only allowed to vote for ONE candidate, and the top three vote-getters win. This allows smaller groups to concentrate and at least get a voice, but it prevents larger ones from stacking the whole deck. An additional restriction that might be useful is that there may be only one director at a time which is employed by a single organization, corporation, or government department. For example, it wouldn't be legal to elect two directors who were both employed by Cisco.

These are the biggest things that ICANN doesn't have, and that any successor organization must have. I'm sure I've missed a few, but it's a good start.

Time to De-Charter ICANN and Start Again.

-Erik

Dangerous precedent

[Ektanoor]

This attempt to turn into a Member at Life is extrmely dangerous. It is not only a problem of elections. Mostly it is a problem on the validity of the White Paper and consequently on the validity of the whole organisation. It seems that some people got too acustomized to the heat of their seats at ICANN and do not want to go in the cold. Soon they may think that ICANN is not doing enough so it should rule that and that. A little more and they will start saying "L'Internet c'est moi"...

There is a interesting point mentioned on the article:
"Back in the days of the White Paper, the document which still provides the foundation for whatever legitimacy ICANN may retain, the United States government assured all that the initial, secretly appointed members of the ICANN Board were only temporary."

Well if these guys get too nuts, then we should direct protests not to them but to the Government of the United States of America. He is the guarantor that the White Paper will not be violated. No matter how feelings, thinkings and relations with this organism, I think that they will not sponsor such clear violation of the principles that rule its establishment. With propper argumentation, they will surely act and tell these guys that is time to leave.

PS: For those who don't know History and/or French. "L'Etat c'est moi" - "The State is me". It was said by King Louis XIV of France during his rise to power. This King was the most famous monarch and despot of the times of Absolutism. During his reign, he managed to concentrate all state control on himself.

Re:Screw This

[BlackHat]

It has been suggested before but go back to trading Host files. Use CGI host, IP adresses, or even write a new dns-app. There are a number of ways you can remove ICANN from your sphere. Their relevence is only what we let them have. Issue has and will be how much power you give ICANN (or its replacement) for the service of propagation and housekeeping. Keep it powerless and Biz will flog it, give it to much and it flogs everyone.

Fine Print

[NevDull]

"ICANN stay here as long as I want" -Initial Boardmembers

-Nev

Why...oh why....

[JoeShmoe]

...can's application and operating systems put a new DNS system as an OPTION (not necessarily even a default). Every program that comes out should add this! I don't care what it is.

One click in Opera or Lynx or Netscape to allow it to check with DNS servers run by people who serve the public interest and not bend over for big business and electing themselves emporer for life? A click in WinAmp to enable you to connect to Shoutcast servers located by a NullSoft DNS server (imagine having TLDs based on music genres?)

Better yet, a list of servers that people could pick or choose from based on reputation. Don't like ICANN? Disable the root servers entirely and get your .com .net .org from AlterNIC or whoever.

Operating Systems to could easily make this a part of their DNS configuration menus.

All we need is someone to create the standards and provide some kind of reputation for DNS servers. Surely this is worthy cause? Won't someone just do the paperwork necessary to start the Domain Freedom Foundation so I can contribute large heaping amounts of cash to something that will kill Network Solutions and ICANN once and for all?

- JoeShmoe

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -

Re:Why...oh why....

[Shotgun]

Because it wouldn't work for any reasonable amount of time.

So company XYZ wants a domain name so that the people can easily find their web site. What name service do they go with? The most popular of course. The people want an easy way to find company XYZ. Which service do they use? The most popular of course.

But company ABC, out of moral impetus, refuses to use the most popular. What's the result? Considering that most people won't even change to a resolution above 640x480x60Hz on a brand new 19' monitor, ABC's site will never see a hit except by a few geeks. To stay in business they must switch to the most popular. Eventually, the only service left will be the most popular. Who will controll it then? Don't say, "We will", unless you're willing to define 'we' and a method of how the 'we' will control. If you can define those two parameters, it makes more sense to replace the head of the current system with your definition than to replace the current extensive infrastructure.

The point is, you can't run and hide to a different technical solution every time someone tries to usurp power. The way of the world dictates that some people work to create, and some people work to dominate the creation of others. If you move to a new technical solution, the dominators will simply move in to take it over. Who else is willing to give up their technical pursuits in order to manage any new solution you come up with? Any one willing to wants the power, not to create new geek toys, so you immediately get yourself into the exact same position.

This is a social problem, not a technical one. This problem requires that geeks pull their heads out of their monitors, stand up and say, "Hell no. You're not going to simply walk in here and claim our work for yourself. Get the hell out." Then we have to install people who want to be in power, but put checks and balances in place. They must know that they can get kicked out just like the last group if they don't look after the proper interest.

I think a valid response would be to get a lot of the big names that actually were responsible for the internet and DNS together (Al Gore would probably like to head up the group), and let them go on for a while about how this group is quickly losing its legitimacy. Especially in America (I can't speak about other cultures since I don't know them), people get upset when they hear of someone usurping the work of another. So all the inventors get together, send a letter to Congress which says, "Heh, they're stealing our stuff", then give a few whiny interviews on Opra. Politician will start raving about the injustice, the Pres will hold some town hall meetings, Heraldo Rivera will do a special where he finds the draft of a DNS spec in a locked vault of a demolished building. In other words, watch how quickly things change to the way we like them.

Always remember, society is just a system. Learn to hack it.

What the hell, maybe I'll go too.

[VValdo]

Although after the debacle of "Microsoft Refund Day" I'm a big hesitant to participate in any such activism.

Promise me no one will be there dressed as Obi Kenobe. Seriously.

W
-------------------

Re:Screw This

[osgeek]

Corporations, politicians, and non-profit organizations!

Those organizations can make problems at times, but with the ICANN, I see the major offenders as the little guru wanna-bees, who are constant malcontents. A few years back, I was a lurker on the main mailing list where domain changes were being discussed and decided. I can't recall the name of the list, but I do recall the political environment. You had some people who were just stellar leaders, like Paul Vixie, who were working their asses off and making sense as proven technical leaders. Then you had a few crack-pots who were always complaining and screaming about every little thing - apparently just to have something to post about.

In a smaller environment like that mailing list, where the participants were more informed, the crack-pots were mostly ignored. Unfortunately, as the process has opened up to a wider audience, that audience hasn't been able to keep abreast of the history and details of the issues. That's really opened up the door for the crack-pots, some of whom have worked their way into ICANN.

It's a shame, but it's a tradeoff that we in the technical community are constantly making. Time and again, we have some technology that seems cool, but lacks the real development that comes with popular acceptance. Unfortunately, with popular acceptance comes the ignorant influence of the masses.

ICANN's legitimacy

[pchown]

When the US government set ICANN up they didn't seem to understand that people had a choice whether to use it or not. You can put services—such as root DNS—on the Internet, but you can't force people to use them.

I could set up a root DNS service tomorrow. No one would use it, but technically it could be done. If ICANN start to depart from what most Internet users want, someone will set up something different that will gain wide acceptance.

Remember the Name.Space people? Their proposal would have worked technically even if there were other reasons why people were against it.