spkr-mueller
Download
Report
Transcript spkr-mueller
Why ICANN failed
Milton Mueller
Associate Professor, Syracuse University
School of Information Studies
Internet Governance
• Governance definition:
– the exploitation of technical bottlenecks or access to
technical resources to regulate socio-economic conduct.
– E.g., broadcasting
• ICANN is in the business of governance, not
technical coordination
– dispute resolution policy and famous marks
– imposing a business model on domain name
registration
– WG discussions
– Sovereignty claims to TLDs
ICANN’s Pre-history
• Internet Architecture Board (IAB) 1990; Internet
Society (ISOC), 1992
• IANA’s attempt to privatize itself, 1995-6
– 150 new gTLDs, $2000 + 2% of revenues
• The IAHC and the gTLD-MoU
–
–
–
–
ISOC-IANA, WIPO, ITU, new registrars
shared registry model
cartel-ized top-level domain space
links domain name assignment to trademark protection
The White Paper and ICANN
• White Paper abdicates direct government action
• Behind-the-scenes agreement with US Govt,
Europeans, IBM, WIPO, and ISOC-IANA on
governance agenda
– essentially the same as gTLD-MoU
• Initial Board gives complete control of ICANN to
gTLD-MoU faction
Conclusions
The rhetoric of “industry self-regulation” was a
mask that allowed a specific coalition of actors,
led by the Internet Society, IBM, and a small
number of European allies, to take over the
administration of the Internet.
Administration concentrated exclusively on ecommerce and ignored implications of handing
governance power to an unaccountable private
entity
Conclusions
ICANN’s initial board was controlled by a single
faction with a specific governance agenda that did
not command consensus.
The determination of that faction to implement its
agenda as quickly as possible fatally undermined
the new corporation’s ability to:
function as a vehicle for consensual “self-regulation”
develop durable, trusted processes
Difficult questions for the future
• Can ICANN be fixed or should we start over?
• How much globalization is appropriate?