EU Domain Registries & ICANN

rob_levine writes "Following on from the announcement a few weeks ago that the U.S. Department Of Commerce intends to retain control of the Internet's root domain servers (originally to be relinquished in 2006), several EU domain registries are preparing to build, test and install a system to prevent U.S. government meddling, according to this article in The Register. Could this be the beginning of the end of the centralised autocracy that is ICANN?"

Comments

So basically.

[Anonymous Coward]

So basically the EU is trying to tell ICANN UCANT?

Re:So basically.

[sofar]

Wow, you sure think this stuff is easy.

The big problem is that legally, nothing stops a US company from getting a court order restraint against ICANN in the future if a .eu domain name infringes on a US trademark.

Got an answer to that? anyone?

Sounds Like Good News

[mechsoph]

Let's hope they set up a good system that we all can use.

I'm not really sure why everyone's so worked up about this. If the US Gov. doesn't run things right, we can all just point our resolvers at an alternate root, like this one. And considering the the US was just maintaining the status quo, it really seems like even less of a big deal.

It looks like these guys are just gonna set up an alternate root for everyone and try to automate the system as much as possible. Hopefully it works.

BTW, anybody else annoyed that all these news articles on this keep confusing DNS with "The Internet?"

Re:I don't see a problem with the US controlling D

[lethalox]

I challenge you to find me an instance where the US government has forcibly via a court order removed a:

1 - Anti-War Site

2 - Site advocating equal right for gay people or any other group

The US may have freedom of speech issues, but not the extent of allowing the DNS System to be run by the UN. Just remember the UN Human Rights committee is chaired by who? Or what is state of free speech in China (I love all the chinese blogs we freedom in the title)?

Re:Shit for shit

[Anonymous Coward]

As a U.S. citizen, and reading from the article,

But what is most disturbing about Gallagher's presentation, is how it endlessly refers to the president. The first slide has a picture of George Bush. The second begins "Thanks to the president's policies, America's economy is strong". The next slide is "The president's broadband vision". The next slide leads with a quote from Bush and two pictures of him. And on and on it goes. There is barely a single slide that doesn't quote from the president.,

it's no wonder there's concern. Isn't this exactly the kind of posturing that U.S. citizens are so quick to criticize when it comes from other nations.

This may not speak to the DNS issue, but it certainly speaks to our tiny view of the world.

Re:Monopoly(TM)

[QuickFox]

There is currently only one network formally referred to as "the internet."

On the contrary, the Internet consists of a huge number of networks that are connected to each other.

In reality, these other countries could easily drop "the internet" and form their own large scale network capable of international communication. Nobody is stopping them.

I'm in Stockholm, Sweden. The United States did not finance and build the TV cable network that connects me to Stockholm's city-wide network of networks. The US did not build the city-wide network of networks either. These networks were financed by, and belong to, the cable company, various other companies, the city of Stockholm, the University of Stockholm, our Technical High School, and so on.

Go build your own if you want one too.

As you see, we already did. The fact that our networks are connected to your networks doesn't mean that you built our networks or that they belong to you.

--