[iwar] [fc:ICANN.caught.red-handed.-.manipulating.its.own.rules.to.protect.existing.members]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-10-26 07:41:25
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Bin.Laden's.nuclear.threat]"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Ashcroft.Discusses.New.Powers]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Message-Id: <200110261441.f9QEfPN23723@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:ICANN.caught.red-handed.-.manipulating.its.own.rules.to.protect.existing.members]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

ICANN caught red-handed - manipulating its own rules to protect existing members

By Kieren McCarthy

Posted: 25/10/2001 at 16:43 GMT

The Internet's overseeing body, ICANN, has been caught red-handed
manipulating its own rules to protect existing members at the expense of its
stated philosophy of openness.

A series of unjustified delays in processing an application by domain
registrar New.net to join one of ICANN's representative bodies (called
constituencies) was followed last week with the rejection of the company's
bid. 

However in the subsequent explanation as to why New.net was not entitled to
join the body, ICANN inadvertently undermined many of the current members of
the Business Constituency (BC) - including such names as AOL, AT&amp;T, BT and
MCI Worldcom. 

This is hardly the first time that ICANN has been accused of bending its
bylaws in order to fit the wishes of the organisation's directors - its
predilection for holding all important meetings in complete secrecy stands
completely at odds with its public role - but rarely has the antipathy
towards those that threaten ICANN's views on how the Internet ought to run
been so apparent. 

New.net applied to become a member of the Business Constituency (one of
seven such groups) on 25 July this year. The BC asks for a six-week period
to consider new applicants and New.net wanted to make sure it was within
this time period so it could attend BC meetings at a big conference in
Uruguay in September.

At the Uruguay meeting, the BC was due to discuss a report on "alternate
roots" and come up with conclusions and recommendations to pass onto the
wider ICANN body. New.net is one of the main companies (certainly the most
well-known) that provide alternate roots - i.e. domains that end with
something other than the ICANN-approved endings like .com, .net and .org.

However, when New.net arrived at Uruguay it was informed that the BC's
"Credentials Committee" had all been on holiday for six weeks and so there
hadn't been time to consider its application. This was universally seen as a
blunt stalling tactic and the meeting over the report went ahead without
New.net's presence or input.

However, the company was surprised when a month later the BC rejected its
application, saying that it was a "registry/registrar" (for which there is
another constituency) and no one group could be a member of more than one
constituency at a time.

New.net asked for clarification on this no-more-than-one-constituency
decision, especially since it has no precedent and goes against the reality
of the situation on the ground. The BC secretariat replied saying: "The BC
charter does not exclude registries and registrars from membership merely
because of their participation in another constituency. The Charter
distinguishes providers of network connectivity/transport, domain name and
other services that enable the development of electronic business, from
their customers. The BC is an independent voice for the customers of such
providers. It is the potential divergence of interests, not the mere
participation in another ICANN constituency, that underlies the membership
criteria." 

Which seems like a reasonable response until you consider that most of the
current members of the Business Constituency have far more glaring conflicts
of interests that New.net, which is small fry in comparison. Companies that
cover all aspects of "providers of network connectivity/transport, domain
name and other services" and in far greater depth than New.net include AOL,
AT&amp;T, BT, Deutsche Telekom, Korea Telecom, MCI Worldcom and Telefonica.

One seasoned observer of ICANN, Milton Mueller, has said of the situation
that it was "equivalent to allowing Ford, General Motors, Toyota and Honda
decide who gets to enter the auto manufacturing business".

There is certainly genuine outrage that ICANN is being so blatant in its
control of critical voices. On ICANN's official site, it describes its
approach to decision-making thus: "ICANN's objective to operate as an open,
transparent, and consensus-based body that is broadly representative of the
diverse stakeholder communities of the global Internet".

Since New.net has been a steady success whereas the companies selling the
new official TLDs .info and .biz have stumbled and fallen in the past few
weeks, it would certainly suggest that it is representative of many Internet
users. 

ICANN has to learn that it can no longer expect to continue running the
Internet as a gentlemen's club. The dismissal of New.net is indicative of a
greater cancer at the heart of ICANN.

Why is ICANN so over-sensitive to any group that dares to question how
things are done? Any organisation afraid to embrace change or criticism is
doomed to failure. The fact that that organisation runs the Internet - the
greatest leap forward in communication among men since the telephone - makes
it all the more ironic. Ž

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE VeriSign guide to security solutions for your web site: encrypting transactions, securing intranets, and more!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/UnN2wB/m5_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Bin.Laden's.nuclear.threat]"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:Ashcroft.Discusses.New.Powers]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:57 PST