 | |
| |
TechnologyDaily Mobile
The Balance Of ICANN Power
by Maureen Sirhal
Earlier this month, the Commerce Department renewed the authority of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) over the global Internet-addressing system. The renewal gives ICANN a much-needed coup, but it also places enormous pressure on the body.
As it convenes this month to finalize a restructuring plan, ICANN faces the challenge of achieving a balance of power among its participants and stakeholders to ensure its survival as the Internet's oversight authority.
A History Of Criticism
Plagued by problems since its inception, ICANN has attracted a stream of criticism over the past few years, which in some cases has resulted in congressional oversight hearings and debate among some foreign regulators over the organization's activities.
For most critics, ICANN's key problems are the way the body seemingly has extended its mission beyond simply coordinating technical aspects of the Internet's domain-name system and its lack of accountability for the rules it creates. Those rules can render a major economic impact on the domain-name retailers and wholesalers. Those companies must follow the ICANN board's decisions, so the firms want more adequate measures for appealing decisions they consider unfair.
Similarly, several advocacy groups have decried ICANN's process for accepting public input in its decision-making, especially input from global Internet users. The organization has dispensed with the idea of holding a global election for Internet board directors.
Those common criticisms, combined with the often-slow nature of ICANN's decision-making, prompted ICANN President Stuart Lynn in February to call for a restructuring plan. And with a freshly extended Commerce agreement in hand, the group is poised to consider the newly proposed set of bylaws during its Oct. 31 board meeting in Shanghai, China.
The new bylaws aim to reflect the key contingents that Commerce stipulated for its renewal of ICANN's authority -- transparency of and accountability for the group's decisions. But ICANN also wants to improve its effectiveness as a means of certifying its legitimacy.
Observers contend that to ensure ICANN's effectiveness, the influence within the organization -- influence often wielded by stakeholders such as Internet service providers, intellectual property proponents and public advocacy organizations -- must be balanced and greater board participation must be encouraged to bolster the panel's authority.
In March, ICANN chose Alejandro Pisanty and two of his fellow board members to lead the group's Committee on Evolution and Reform, which has been spearheading the internal overhaul. For nearly eight months, Pisanty and his colleagues have been soliciting input from businesses, individuals and advocacy groups -- both domestic and foreign -- for reform ideas.
"I think there is very strong pressure on ICANN," Pisanty said. "I don't think every part of ICANN's community sees how much pressure [there is] outside of its own area."
Last Chance At Life 'The Internet Way'
In crafting new bylaws for the organization, Pisanty noted, ICANN faces a critical test that could lead to failure of the notion behind ICANN: private-sector leadership for the information age. He characterized the effort as "the last chance to do this the Internet way."
Several groups have expressed satisfaction with ICANN's proposed structural changes. Jeff Neuman, who heads a constituency group for the operators of generic domain-name suffixes, praised a key measure sought by domain retailers and wholesalers: equal representation for contracting and non-contracting ICANN parties within a policy council of the proposed Generic Names Supporting Organization. The policy council would spearhead the bottom-up process for developing ICANN policy recommendations.
Some advocates also believe the proposed rules will create a better conduit for public input into ICANN's decisions. With the exception of an election held in 2000 that produced five new board members, the public really has no formal role in ICANN. And even after the organization's first election, its leaders feared that future, global online votes could be susceptible to fraud or even unfair domination by certain demographic groups.
Under the proposed reform, an at-large public advisory committee would elect one non-voting ICANN board member. Denise Michel, who is spearheading an initiative to boost individual participation in ICANN, said "an At-Large Advisory Committee would certainly be a big step forward for individual users."
Governments and technical experts also would find added participation in ICANN: A representative from each sector, as well as a non-voting board member, would serve in the body. Pisanty noted that the structure attempts to give the highest sectors of the Internet community serious input into ICANN.
But reforming "structure" may imply reforming "culture," and a crucial challenge for ICANN is to transform the mindset within the organization. Over the years, ICANN has attracted lobbying by only a miniscule group of individuals, businesses and public advocates.
"I think it's always good to have new blood," Lynn said in making his announcement earlier this year to resign come March 2003. "One of my concerns about some of the positions that have been advocated is that they were not conducive for making it attractive for new people to come to the table."
Pisanty noted that some ICANN stakeholders "prefer the old system" and have resisted efforts to restructure how groups influence the decision-making process.
The .org Decision: A Harbinger Of Doom?
An ICANN staff recommendation finalized last month has stirred new criticism of the oversight body. The plan calls for the Internet Society, a global nonprofit for Internet professionals, to run the .org registry. The nonprofit would sell domain names for $6 each to retailers. With an existing database of 2 million names, the deal would be worth a substantial sum of money.
Ten other groups had competed for that job. And now many of the companies that rallied for renewal of the ICANN/Commerce agreement now are criticizing ICANN for its handling of the reassignment of the database for .org domain-name suffixes. Many of the .org applicants said that the ICANN staff recommendations were based on inaccurate assessments of applications. Additionally, several applicants noted that the Internet Society's proposal lacked details on how it would manage the daily functions of the .org registry. Observers close to the process have said ICANN must get the decision right or risk eroding the value of its mantra of reform.
Lynn said any ICANN decision like the one on the .org database will disappoint some parties. "Obviously, they want to do what they can to be successful," he said.
Others contend that the .org selection process reflects the long-held practice of ICANN's board rubberstamping any ICANN staff recommendations on critical decisions. While the board is not obligated to approve the staff proposal, many observers expect it to do just that. But Pisanty disagreed with that assertion. He said ICANN board members "think very carefully about the proposals that come before them."
With enough disenfranchised parties, and the failure for ICANN to achieve some of the benchmarks stated in its renewed Commerce agreements, the organization could simply implode within the next year, some critics say. Management of the system then would revert back to the Commerce Department and could lead to fragmentation of the Internet. One observer close to the matter gives ICANN a 50-percent chance of survival.
That is why, Pisanty said, the group must adopt a reform consensus in its meeting this month. "We have to make a new negotiations with society, governments and companies on how [the Internet] is going to be used," he said.
NEW FEATURE
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
