Slashdot Mirror
ICANN Bucharest Meeting Comes to a Close
ICANN has been meeting in Bucharest this week; as this story goes live (assuming I handled the time zones correctly) they'll be starting their last day of meetings. Highlights of the day will almost certainly include the ICANN Board voting to eliminate the public participation that they were charged with implementing and have fought against for the last several years, and ICANN implementing a domain name tax to fund their operations. ICANN dismisses cynics who complain about taxation without representation. You can view the webcast online, assuming that the volunteers doing it manage to keep it up. If you prefer text, you may like Roessler's weblog or the ICANN blog (highly recommended), which also has many links to news stories, not that the reporters generally understand the issues very well.
so iwonder how long it will take congress to regulate them as well, maybe i'm mistaken but i was under the impression the TLD's were/are managed in the US and when industries that are on the cutting edge of technology need a push congress usually does it (see hdtv adn broadband services for examples) of course that doesn't mean it's a good thing..
Apparently you can sponsor ICANN, they use this money for meetings, etc. . .
Here's the levels from their site -
Three Levels of Sponsorship are available:
Top Level: US$15,000
Second Level: US$10,000
Third Level: US$5,000
My question is who in their right mind is sponsoring them? Normally a sponsorship would give you a little bit of influence, and ICANN seems to do whatever the hell they want. So the question is why would you sponsor these guys?
I wonder if ICANN's new policies will encourage megalomanical slashdot editors to demolish community-run censorware-related sites.
why does this page look so weird?? I hit refresh 3 times, same thing.
For those of you who are in L.A., ICANN is hiring! :)
From ICANN's "About ICANN" page:
Link is here
I have to ask: Why is a non-profit organization levying taxes? What's next? Make-a-wish foundation taxes terminally ill patients who haven't progressed very far in their illnesses to pay for trips to Disneyland for those kids who are very very sick? It's absurd!
I should have picked out the nickname Demosthenes!Tecumseh.
I've been researching trying to find a solution to resolve the page-width adjusting problem occuring with some threads such as this one. So far, the posts causing the problem contain several &#x(numbers) that produce one long "word" even though there are spaces within the post. I'm not sure, but, it seems as if there's many hex codes that can cause this.
So far the following preceeded with an ampersand (&) cause the problem:
#x003
#x2022
I hope these are filtered out in the future. Any time I see the problem, though, I will post this same message (updated though with any new causes) in hopes that someone fixes the problem. It's f***ing annoying!
If you're religishitty, KILL YOURSELF!
The audio in the realaudio stream is getting really flakey, switching between stereo and mono, but much worse - it occasionally just stops with a loud *pop*, which is actually painful when you have headphones on, not to mention the microphone feedback. Download the show afterward if you have headphones.
Ack - my ears!
:^)
Ryan Fenton
Okay, if you have an interim government and say
"Come up with acceptable terms for elections, run the elections and step down."
and they deliberate for a few years and say
"Nope, no elections, sorry. Impractical. Instead, we're going to have an enlightened dictatorship where those qualified to make decisions appoint your rulers. It's better. Democracy is a noble experiment, but doomed to fail."
what do you do?
You fire the interim government; you do so with dispatch! They've violated their charter - they've lost all legitimacy. End of story.
Personally, I'd just as soon keep the five elected members we have, since they have the legitimacy which the rest of the board lacks.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
Well this is another example of what happens when you an organization has a monopoly. Even a non-profit organization has fallen to collecting taxes and not accepting public input in the tradition of the benevolent dictator. The question is whether they will continue to grow in power or will the government step in or will some other group arise from the internet to try and wrestle control from icann.
I stole this Sig
Comment removed based on user account deletion
here is a nice snip from http://icann.blog.us/categories/bucharest/
I lost the video feed just as Stuart Lynn was saying that the 25 cent per domain name fee wasn't a tax. I agree. That is rhetoric. Someone wrote to me today and asked why I thought this wasn't a tax. I wrote back: "It's a fee for services. It's like going into McDonalds, ordering french fries, and then calling the price of the fries 'a french fry tax.' ICANN coordinates the management of the domain name system. If you operate a registry or registrar, you get a direct benefit from that. Likewise, if you're a domain name registrant."
Tax:
a: a charge usually of money imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes
b: a sum levied on members of an organization to defray expenses
It IS a tax but it's also a justified one. Face it, someone should have to help out in the cost and i doubt anyone would if it wasn't manitory. Hell, would you pay income tax if on the form was a checkbox for 'Do you want to help fund your gov? Y/n.'
Here's something that bugs me: these guys are a corporation, an international corporation. If they have the right to levy taxes, what stops any other international corporation with a monopoly from taxing us?
Gio
-EOF-
The proposal has the potential to be a massive money-earner for both Verisign and Snapnames, at the expense of consumers.
Under the proposal, people will be able to "subscribe" to a waiting list a bit like Snapname's current service (www.snapnames.com). Unfortunately, under the scheme, subscriptions are likely to cost US$40-70 *PER YEAR*. Yes, that means if a domain name doesn't expire for 10 years, you'll be paying, say, US$50 every year just for the chance of owning it. This contrasts with other expiring-name services like www.namewinner.com that only charge you in the event that you get the name. One aim of the proposal is to address the massive speculation that occurs for expiring domain names. However, a WLS would just create speculation in WLS subscriptions!
I'd even go so far as to say that the moderator is a Terrorist and should be strung up, and tarred and feathered like my granpa used to do back when men were men.
Just because it's a justified tax in your opinion doesn't make it one in someone else's. True, a quarter per domain isn't a lot. But look, it's being imposed by a random group of unelected officials the internet public at large has no power over. What if next year they raise it five bucks? You already agreed a quarter was OK, and you implicitly agreed they had the POWER to tax you by paying it. It goes up to fifty bucks the year after that. Sorry, costs have risen as they seem to do in large bureaucracies that lack any oversight. Then five hundred bucks, and so on until private citizens can't even afford domain names. Only big corporations can. What can you do about it? Can't vote 'em out, can't impeach 'em, can't do shit.
They need to be reined in BEFORE they get out of hand. "No taxation without representation" means just that, NO taxation. It isn't "No taxation without representation unless, like, it's for a good cause and it's justified, and besides no one would help out if it wasn't mandatory..."
All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
That I am all that surprised by any of this. Face it folks, this is kind of like what the world would be like if M$ were sued by .gov, but then allowed to appoint the judge and defense counsel. And I quite agree that these people need to go away, but the fact is that even if the current administration was actually interested in shutting down proto-fascist organizations like ICANN, re-centering the power they have would take a massive effort on the part of citizens to lobby their congressman/representatives to do so, and very few of the non-tech crowd have ever even heard of ICANN.
I'm sorry to say that we will probably have to put up with this until the system totally fails, then it will take over a year or so to make a new one. I am, of course, basing this on the 9/11 (non)response.
But I suppose there is always hope. The votes haven't actually happened yet, have they?
ARIN, RIPE, and APNIC are getting pissed at them, and have publically suggested that ICANN restrict its role to whatever it is they're supposed to be doing and leave tech admin to organizations capable of doing it. <p?Their budget is spiraling and for that, we get the same kind of root administration we've been getting from Verisign and probably could get from another vendor with better results and for a fraction of the cost.
Their only real products appears to be hot air and bullshit.
Whether you're a US taxpayer or you're a domain name holder anywhere in the world... we're paying for this, what the hell are we getting out of this?
A domain name dispute resolution process universally regarded as unfair outside the Fortune 500? It would be more cost effective and equally fair to require disputants to disclose their net worths and award the domain to the party with the greater net worth.
It's time for some Congressman to carry a bill to unplug their funding... and resume contracting with Verisign to run the root via NSF pending figuring out a better solution.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Don't many dictatorships end in some kind of revolution?
Usually it takes extreme circumstances-- If the dictatorship becomes too oppressive, sooner or later they will be overthrown.
What would it take to overthrow ICANN? I think it would be a tremendous number of egregious crimes that affect a majority of Internet users.
What would an ICANN revolution look like? I don't know. A non-violent overthrow would need a viable replacement, and so far Alternet and new.net don't seem to be getting the traction they need.
Perhaps someone needs to come up with a whole new idea in naming and identifying computers and systems that is technically and practally superior to the current system-- something so compelling that people will choose to use it over ICANN.
I'd be interested in reading suggestions-- what would it take to overthrow ICANN? The Internet is so good at routing around central authorities. So how to bring the power back to the people?
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
There is nothing wrong with a monopoly, and in situations where there exists what econominists call a natural monopoly, a monopoly is better. Provided that its regulated of course.
All things consitered, if it takes the US congress another 5 years before it pulls the plug on ICANN, or implements an effective regulatory body, then the US congress is acting relativly fast.
Well, not if you consider a monarchy a dictatorship. Only is the last 200 years or so have those really started to fail. Many countries lasted for millenia under a 'dictator' king.
Also, why non-violent over-throw? I say, lets just kill everyone at ICANN and be done with it.
(I'm just kidding, of course)
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
One is a forced tax which you have to pay to live and not goto jail, while the other is more of a service charge then a tax(but still a tax!).
The british were taxing things like tea, paper, granular sugar, etc. While all of those things are important, they are not needed to live.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
These Trade Fede... sorry ICANN types are such fools! Their droid army will be CLONED and wiped out!
TO ICANN LAWYERS - JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE
Why do ICANN stick with Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue? Is it because of certain old ICANN links with them? Are JDRP profiteering? They are very costly - have ICANN looked for other Law firms?
Have you checked out JDRP.com - and their people involvement with ICANN?
A quote from a Karl Auerbach:
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue is ICANN's law firm, and has been so since the day of ICANN's birth. Indeed Jones-Day actually performed the incorporation ceremony in its Los Angeles offices.
Jones, Day, in the person of its principle man-on-the-ICANN-scene, Joe Sims, was present for at least half a year before ICANN was born, working in the shadows, responding to unknown interests and possibly making unknown deals. About all we know about that period is that those who were not insiders to Joe Sims process were ignored and that those who objected were treated with condescension and abuse.
Over the life of ICANN, Jones, Day has been the the dominant creditor of ICANN.
Even now Jones, Day continues to receive a lion's share of every dollar that flows into ICANN.
And one of Jones, Day's partners, Louis Touton, left the firm to become ICANN's Vice-President, Secretary, and General Counsel.
There is in my mind a question about the appearance of propriety.
Karls platform.
***End quote.
In a good two month period, October and November 2000, they got $465,553.67 from ICANN.
ICANN minutes.
As it one of the largest intellectual property practice groups in a general-practice law firm - with more than 85 intellectual property lawyers, I would imagine Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue make a lot of money on trademarks problems on the Internet.
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue.
Virtually every word is trademarked, be it Alpha to Omega or Aardvark to Zulu - even common words you learnt with your A B C's - apple, ball and cat - most many times over.
MOST share the same words or initials with MANY others in a different business and/or country. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) shares its initials with six trademarks - U.S. alone (please check). Conflict is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.
The solution to this problem has been ratified by experts - so that ALL registered trademarks can be identified on the Internet.
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue know this solution.
They would lose a lot of money, if there was less trademark problems on the Internet - wouldn't they?
Draw your own conclusions - but it is my opinion they do not want the solution to 'consumer confusion', 'trademark conflict' and 'passing off' problems on the Internet.
There is in my mind certainly no question about the appearance of corruption - it is beyond doubt.
Please visit WIPO.org.uk to see. No connection with the United Nations WIPO.org.
Is there serious research into letting people control the addresses of computers (at any scale) using names/monikers or other simple word systems? I'm aware of AOL keywords and such but am thinking more P2P'ish.
It would be cool if we could all run a tiny server that let's us name our computers the way we like and lets people see a directory of computers connected to each other. This would not be suitable for existing browsers but would be cool for new-generation P2P services.
Any ideas/comments?
I'm all for talking to my representatives. However, I'm at a loss as to any alternatives. My usual mode of argument is to point out the flaws of ______, and propose a savior system _____ with its own, less dangerous flaws. Any ideas?
Michael C. Hollinger
and have no representation in congress; no senator and no voting representative. It's not like we don't pay federal taxes or anything like that. Worse yet, D.C. residents pay District taxes and guess who decides how the money is spent? The U.S. Congress. Do I have a say? No.
Am I a U.S. Citizen? Yes, born and raised. Taxation without representation... what's new?
Was there symbolism in the choice of Rumania as a meeting site?
Lets go over the facts.
,2295
1. ICANN had public elections.
2. They worked pretty damn well. Probably better than the previous US election for President. Don't recall 15 recounts, looking at chads, divits, partial penetration, etc.
3. Not only did the elections work, but they produced the "right" results. I'm referring here to Karl Auerbach and Andy Mueller-Maguhn being elected. They didn't work perfectly everywhere -- especially Africa -- and ICANN's jumped on that as an excuse to do away with them; i.e., "because so few people voted in Africa, we have to do away with elections and just control everything ourselves -- buahahahaha." Lets look at the results of these elections (winners marked by *):
AFRICA:
Calvin Browne 30
Alan Levin 33
**Nii Quaynor 67**
TOTAL 130
ASIA/AUSTRALIA/PACIFIC:
Johannes Chiang 935
Lulin Gao 1,750
**Masanobu Katoh 13,913**
Hongjie Li 749
Sureswaran Ramadas 398
TOTAL 17,745
EUROPE:
Maria Livanos Cattaui 514
Alf Hansen 629
Jeanette Hofmann
**Andy Mueller-Maguhn 5,948**
Olivier Muron 544
Oliver Popov 389
Winfried Schueller 990
TOTAL 11,309
LATIN AMERICA AND CARRIBEAN:
**Ivan Moura Campos 946**
Raul Echeberria 141
Claudio Silva Menezes 157
Aluisio S. Nunes 79
Patricio Poblete 79
TOTAL 1,402
AMERICA: (of course everything in the US is complicated, so there were 6 stages of voting; I'll just summarize the first stage, which is pretty much representative)
Karl Auerbach 1,074
Lyman Chapin 127
Donald Langenberg 83
Lawrence Lessig 725
Harris Miller 179
Barbara Simons 771
Emerson Tiller 490
TOTAL 3,449
Gee, I don't see how these elections didn't work. Please fill me in on that one. I don't know anything about these guys other than Auerbach*, Lessig, and Mueller-Maguhn*, but it seems like it worked fine to me. Great guys got elected -- Auerbach and Mueller-Maguhn. Too bad the US couldn't be represented twice, b/c Lessig would've done well. Anyways, it works fine. Yes, very few people voted in Africa and other poor regions: duh, most of them don't have the internet. Yes, few people (relatively speaking) voted in the rich nations: duh, even in presidential elections, turnout is normally low.
Its better having an election with low turnout than no elections at all, or than having an election with high turnout of voters who don't know what the fuck is going on.
What ICANN's really bitching about is that the elections didn't go THEIR way. Hillary Rosen, Jack Valentini, or Bill Gates didn't get elected as ICANN members -- that's their gripe.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
testing testes £
:-D
Cool beans