Slashdot Mirror


US Govt Wants to Control ICANN?

blankmange writes "ZDNet is covering a new piece of legislation that may be introduced by Sen. Conrad Burns that would give the US government more control of ICANN - the independent corporation that controls the domain-naming system of the internet. 'In a statement released two days before a Senate subcommittee is scheduled to hold hearings on the global body, Burns said the change was necessary because ICANN has exceeded its authority, does not operate in an open fashion, and is dangerously unaccountable to Internet users, businesses and other key interest groups.'"

5 of 420 comments (clear)

  1. That's the catch with ICANN by jht · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ICANN may be an international body, but much of their authority came courtesy of the US government. It would take a major consensus from virtually all ISP's (in the US and the rest of the world as well) to allow a different body to take control of DNS. Since ICANN's authority came via the US government, theoretically it can be taken away as well. Given the way ICANN operates, that may not be a Bad Thing. It might be nice to have a "do-over" with ICANN and try and get it right this time.

    Of course, if Jon Postel hadn't passed on far before his time, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

    One interesting point in the article: the GAO rep said that domain name registration had fallen from about $50 to $10 due to ICANN. Check me if I'm wrong here, but I very clearly remember that when NSI started charging for domain names (I also still remember when they were free) they charged $35/year. Not $50. And that's still the price from them today (though they offer longer-term discounts) - other registrars are free to charge what they want and generally undercut NSI.

    --
    -- Josh Turiel
    "2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
  2. Re:Pot? Is that you? by SirSlud · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh please. You know, for all the corruption, backdoor deals, conspiracies, etc, etc private companies have infinately more legistlation in place to protect their ability to do shit behind your back. I will never understand why people fear/dislike their government more than private companies who never even have to let you know anything strange is going on unless they get caught.

    Kinda hard to knock the government when the problem in this case is clearly that the body is operating more like a company than a regulatory body as it should be.

    Government 'n business may be in cahoots, but at least there are still some laws that force the government to be open about its dealings, even if its not always effectively enforced or followed. Aisde, there doesn't seem to be much public push for making soft donations 'n influence of that nature public, so we can lay the blame there on ourselves.

    I'm not saying the government is perfect, but it seems to be that private, even public companies, are in an infinately better position to manipulate your opinions and consent, and not be held accountable for it. Hell, MS's potentially illegal OEM agreement is/was marked as a trade secret, so nobody could look at it. What a joke. I'll trust my government more than companies any day of the week.

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  3. No need to panic just yet by wiredog · · Score: 5, Insightful
    He "said he likely would introduce a bill". Hmmm. First the bill has to be introduced to the Senate. Then he needs co-sponsors. Then it has to get through committee where it may be amended, and he's a Republican and the Democrats control the Senate. Then the it has to be scheduled for a vote. Then the Senate debates (and possibly amends) it. Then it's voted on. Then the same process in the House. Then the House ans Senate versions have to be reconciled, and the reconciled version has to be voted on. Then the President has to sign it.

    This all has to happen during this session, which only has 50 working days left, and which has much else (such as the Department of Homeland Security) on its plate.

  4. Just Go To The Meetings by m_evanchik · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've had enough of you whiners and complainers. ICANN operates in a fair and free fashion. Their meeting are open to the public.

    Just because you missed their last meeting in Ghana, doesn't mean it's not too late catch the bus over to Romania.

    I understand that the next meeting will be on the dark side of the Moon. They don't want the pale Lunarians feeling left out of the loop.

  5. Dubious by oldstrat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Dubious, and I don't mean George.
    Through law, one way or another there is government control (ours or someone else's govt.) of just about everything, now.

    What we need are some serious lawsuits to clarify the rules or non rules.
    I for one want to go back to some rules that should never have been changed and another that should have always been.

    Rule one - First come first served.
    The heck with who owns a copyright or trademark, this is a seperate space.
    You want it, get in line, get in line early, if you miss out try to buy it, if you can't buy it, rent it or come up with something else.

    Rule two - One Domain name per customer.
    dove.unilever.com is just fine, the space for dove.com should belong to someone else.
    'www.' should be depricated.

    Rule three - The name must be in active use.
    The lack of this rule has created squaters, and ties directly into the previous two rules.

    Somebody had the rules system pretty close to right in the begining, too bad they wrecked it.

    And last the rule that never was, but should have been.
    You should register once, only once.
    Renewal is a form of extortion at worst, taxation at best, and really creates a situation in which the root registrar is the actual owner.
    This is a public database, registration fees are understandable, but after it is registered, administration is trivial and should be financed by the folks who are pulling daily feeds for the BIND servers that are actually routing it commercially.

    Off the soapbox.