Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumabjorn
Why would anyone care about who is in charge of creating domain names?
|
I think this is an especially important issue. I’m certainly no expert on domain names but I am sure the outcome of this will affect me personally. I think most of us have heard complaints , whether they are justified or not, about the way the Internet names are managed. Control of domain names obviously requires a complex set of decisions with wide ranging political, social and economic impacts.
The granting authority ends up with the details about each applicant for a name attached to their assigned URL. That seems harmless enough but as Prestigititweeze points out, it gets complicated quickly. This function can deny domain names but also whoever does it is responsible for deciding who gets the name: a certain way to be accused of favoritism. It gets more complicated by the international nature of the Internet.
What one jurisdiction sees as an expression of freedom of speech another sees as sedition: a criminal act. What role should this function have at stopping and not promoting criminal behavior on the Internet? In fact, what is a criminal act on the Internet when it spans so many different jurisdictions?
ICANN was criticized for having a “laissez-faire” attitude because they assigned names without making commercial or political judgments. Whatever entity gets stuck with this important and sensitive task is bound to face a perception of favoritism, political meddling, and religious and ethical interference, yet without the assignment of domain names the Internet will stop working.
If ICANN isn’t trusted because it’s located in the US, maybe the task should be turned over to an international body. Or maybe governments should be required to establish protocols to define issues like what constitutes spying, what constitutes cyber crime, and how to separate censorship from legitimate extensions of copyright and legitimate concerns for protecting the different mores and the religious sensitivities of diverse nations.
I don’t know how these issues can be settled but having the US government back out of the picture means some other authority has to make a decision, even if all it does is act as the authority that signs a continuing contract with ICANN--or with a different company, or maybe it will create something new like a UN agency of some sort, or gives the job to some version of Interpol, or whatever. But whoever “they” are who are given the job, it seems that someone has to make a decision in the next year.