DNS |
Sponsored by |
"Forms grow out of principles and operate to continue the principles they grow from."
Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man"
The debate over what management structure is needed to transform ICANN has moved from "Foreign Affairs" and some online discussions to the halls of Oxford University. Last week there was a one day event at Oxford on how to transform ICANN. There was also a meeting in Berlin on these issues. The coverage of these is limited to the few online publications that can afford to send reporters.
For a business that started with few competitors and unlimited markets, the domain name registration trade has certainly become quite difficult and price sensitive. As the owner or manager of your firm, you have a basic choice to make: You can pull back and ride out this difficult period, or you can use this disruption to your advantage. Can a savvy owner or manager bring profitable growth to his or her company? One positive answer may not be in familiar spaces, but in new markets.
The secondary domain market has gone from one extreme to another. First, huge sums were paid for some domains, raising the expectations of domain sellers. Now, however, in many cases the corporate sector expects to pick up a domain for next to nothing in comparison with the domain's immediate sales and long-term investment potential. In my opinion, both situations are unrealistic.
Michael Froomkin, a Professor of Law at the University of Miami School of Law and one of the founding members of ICANNWatch has recently written an article for the Harvard Law Review called, "[email protected]: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace". One of the areas covered in this article is a comparison made between the ICANN model and that of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).
Michael Froomkin has underlined several lessons that can be learned from this contrast, including a suggestion "that claiming kinship with the IETF model is a way of claiming legitimacy, but that not every one who makes this claim is entitled to do so".
What follows is a two-part interview with Michael Froomkin and a closer look at his recent article in the Harvard Law Review.
What happens if ICANN fails? Who will run the DNS then?
Of course to many, ICANN already has failed -- spectacularly so. Critics have long complained that ICANN not only lacks accountability and legitimacy, but also that it is inefficient (at best) and downright destructive (at worst). According to these critics, ICANN's many sins include threatening the stability of the Internet, limiting access by imposing an artificial domain name scarcity, and generally behaving like a petulant dictator.
"ICANN remains the frontier institution and the test case for global governance in the IT sector," writes Zoe Baird in an article in the November-December 2002 issue of "Foreign Affairs". Baird is the President of the Markle Foundation. Her article "Governing the Internet: Engaging Government, Business and Nonprofits" appears in "Foreign Affairs", a magazine usually devoted to the discussion of American foreign policy interests.
The opening line of the article is striking. "The rapid growth of the Internet," Baird writes, "has led to a worldwide crisis of governance." On the surface, a serious problem has been identified. There is the promise of a fruitful discussion to follow.
In a recent interviewed with Roger Collins, president of ProProject and the new owner of Afternic.com, CircleID investigates the logics behind ProProject's strong belief in the domain name secondary market. Once known as a primary domain name auction site, Register.com had purchased Afteric.com in the September of 2000 for $48 million in cash and stock -- 2 years later the site was shut down as money-losing unit until ProProject came along.
In the last article we examined the language in Stuart Lynn's A Plan for Action Regarding New gTLDs, and I addressed concerns about specific language in that document. In this article, I will examine several questions of importance that need to be addressed when discussing new gTLD policy; questions that Mr. Lynn leaves unanswered in his proposal...
When it comes to stealing domain names, I suspect that there are two reasons why so many web bandits appear to be immune from ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers uses the acronym ICANN): the first reason I discussed in my last column on domain name theft (where I described a substantive void in domain name "regulation" as a primary factor for the increasing incidence of domain name theft), the second reason, which is the focus of this column, is the procedural anomaly that currently infuses ICANN's uniform dispute resolution process (UDRP) by providing no administrative forum for domain name registrants who become victims of domain name theft carried out by ICANN's registrars.
Last month ICANN began soliciting comments on Stuart Lynn's A Plan for Action Regarding New gTLDs, which will be one of the Internet governance organization's primary discussion topics at its December meeting in Amsterdam.