Showing posts with label Larry Strickling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Larry Strickling. Show all posts

2016-09-17

Sen. Cruz Questions NTIA's Strickling, ICANN's Marby & Witnesses (videos)

For your viewing pleasure or edification this weekend, watch video replays of U.S. Senator Ted Cruz taking on all comers--Obama administration NTIA's Larry Strickling, ICANN CEO Goran Marby and in absentia former ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade, as well as the ICANN "multistakeholder community" including U.S. tech giants Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc.--only in America! 

So get out the popcorn, or your favorite beverage, kickback and enjoy, laugh, cry, rant or cheer, depending on your perspective, as the champion debater from Princeton University and Harvard Law School (Cruz was editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude), plays the leading role of internet savior and hero, or villain, again depending on your perspective!

Videos below courtesy of Senator Cruz and YouTube.com, published Sept. 14, 2016. For more background and perspectives see: Ted Cruz has made an obscure Internet agency his first post-presidential crusade | WashingtonPost.com and these Domain Mondo posts:

Newsclip introduction by Fox News sets the scene--"ICYMI: FNC's Special Report Covers Cruz Hearing on Obama's Internet Giveaway"--

Sen. Cruz Questions NTIA Assistant Secretary Strickling:

Sen. Cruz Questions ICANN's CEO & President Marby - Part 2:

Sen. Cruz Questions Witnesses at Internet Freedom Subcommittee Hearing - Part 3:

Sen. Cruz Questions Witnesses at Internet Freedom Subcommittee Hearing - Part 4:

Sen. Cruz Questions Witnesses at Internet Freedom Subcommittee Hearing - Part 5:


 feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2016-09-15

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz vs ICANN and IANA Transition: Veni, Vidi, Vici?

Sen. Cruz's Opening Statement at Protecting Internet Freedom Subcommittee Hearing, Sept 14:

Video above: US Senator Cruz's Opening Statement at Protecting Internet Freedom Subcommittee Hearing September 14, 2016 (transcript further below). See also on Domain MondoIANA Transition Hearing: Implications of Ending US Oversight of the Internet for the witnesses' (prepared) testimony, and the full hearing video replay link.

Say what you will, it was Subcommittee Chairman Ted Cruz's hearing from beginning to end. He came prepared with charts, even warning NTIA employees, including NTIA's Larry Strickling, that violating the Federal Antideficiency Act could end their careers and incur prison sentences of up to 2 years. At times, it even seemed as if ICANN's former President and CEO Fadi Chehade was on trial in absentia (see photos below).

While it may have been entertaining D.C. drama for some, what effect, if any, it will have on the IANA stewardship transition (scheduled to be complete October 1), is yet to be seen. TheHill.com reports it is not clear just how much support there is for Cruz’s position among Republicans though Senate Commerce Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) was quoted as saying:
"We’re working trying to coordinate with Cruz and others who have concerns about the [IANA] transition ... I think that right now we all want that on September 30 that transition does not occur because we don’t think it’s ready yet. He may have a different endgame than we do, but right now our objective is the same."
Photos from Cruz Senate Subcommittee Hearing Sept 14, 2016 | DomainMondo.com
U.S. Senate Subcommittee Hearing September 14, 2016
Transcript of US Senator Cruz's Opening Statement at Protecting Internet Freedom Subcommittee Hearing September 14, 2016 via YouTube.com:

0:00  the internet is one of the most revolutionary forces ever unleashed on
0:05  the world this transformational technology has changed how we learn how
0:10  we communicate how we do commerce how we live our lives people even meet and get
0:17  married through the internet and of course the internet didn't invent itself
0:23  it wasn't invented by any politicians it was invented by the incredible ingenuity
0:30  of the American people with the financial support of american taxpayers
0:35  in the spirit of freedom and generosity that is the essence of our great nation
0:41  the American people didn't try to keep the internet just for themselves but
0:45  made it available for the benefit of all humanity since the internets inception
0:51  the United States government has stood guard over critical internet functions
0:56  in almost any other country that power could have been used to deny internet
1:01  access to websites that were deemed politically undesirable or unpopular on
1:07  or threatening or simply disfavored by the powers that be but not here not in
1:15  the United States because of the first amendment to our Constitution which
1:19  affords more protection for speech than anywhere else in the world the United
1:24  States government as long as it has authority to oversee the infrastructure
1:30  of the internet has a duty to ensure that no website is denied internet
1:35  access on account of the ideas that espouses under the guardianship of the
1:41  United States and the First Amendment the Internet has become truly an oasis
1:45  of freedom but that could soon change in 16 days without seeking the consent of
1:53  the American people without seeking the consent of Congress the Obama
1:58  administration is stated that it intends to relinquish the government its
2:01  historic guardianship and give it instead to an international body known
2:07  as ICANN
2:07  now what is ICANN
2:10  it is not a democratic body it is a corporation with Byzantine governing
2:16  structure designed to blur the lines of accountability that is run by global
2:21  bureaucrats who are supposedly accountable to the technocrats to
2:26  multinational corporations to governments including some of the most
2:30  oppressive regimes in the world like China Iran and Russia sadly ICANN
2:38  officials have already begun showing extraordinary affinity for China the
2:42  world's worst abusers of Internet freedom
2:45  according to Freedom House and 2015 numerous I can gathering to feature
2:50  Chinese officials responsible for Chinese government censorship and
2:54  propaganda ICANN's recently departed president/ceo Fadi Chehade who shepherded
3:04  the transition plan through the Obama administration made China a central focus
3:10  within ICANN and the future of that organization Mr. Chehade is on record
3:16  saying that quote  ...  "engagement with China is not an option
3:21  if we do not engage with China at every level of our community we frankly lose a
3:27  part of our global legitimacy." It is striking that an organization we are
3:34  being told we should trust with control of the internet believes that legitimacy
3:39  depends upon engaging in a regime that is the world's leading censor on the
3:44  internet silencing speech on the internet and that imprisons democracy
3:50  and human rights advocate and nobel laureate ... not surprisingly Mr.
3:59  Chehade left ICANN after the transition plan was approved to lead a high-level
4:03  working group for wait for it
4:07  China's World Internet Conference
4:11  a conference that was rightly criticized for refusing to let New York Times and
4:16  Washington Post reporters cover it as a result Reporters Without Borders
4:22  demanded a boycott calling China an enemy of the internet and yet we are
4:28  being asked to trust an organization without having our government have the
4:34  authority to protect free speech to trust an organization whose former
4:38  leader who shepherded this plan has gone to associate himself with and stand with
4:44  those who are in the words of reporters without borders the enemy of the
4:49  internet once the government's out of the picture
4:56  First Amendment protections go away the first amendment by its term binds the
5:02  government doesn't bind private individuals that means when I can
5:06  escapes from government authority ICANN can escape from having to worry about
5:11  the First Amendment having to worry about protecting your rights or my
5:14  rights
5:15  imagine an Internet run like one of our large private universities today with
5:25  speech codes and safe zones an internet that determine some terms are too scary
5:33  microaggressions are two troubling we will not allow them to be spoken on the
5:37  Internet
5:37  imagine an Internet run like far too many European countries that punish
5:45  so-called hate speech a notoriously malleable concept that has often
5:52  been used to suppress views disfavored by those in power are imagine an
5:58  Internet run by like many Middle Eastern countries that punish what they deem to
6:05  be blasphemy
6:07  imagine an Internet run like China or Russia that punish and incarcerate those
6:15  who engage in political dissent. Now some will say none of that parade of horrible
6:22  will happen there's nothing to fear here in handing control of the internet to
6:27  this international group of stakeholders this mini-UN well that's what this
6:34  hearing is here to determine--is there something to fear--and i will point out a
6:45  question I think a lot of Americans are asking is: why risk it?
6:50  the internet right now works it's not broken
6:54  what is the problem that is trying to be solved here that's what this hearing is
7:02  about ...

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2016-09-14

IANA Transition Hearing: Implications of Ending US Oversight of the Internet

Photographs: Senator Ted Cruz; ICANN CEO Göran Marby
L to R: Senator Ted Cruz; ICANN CEO Göran Marby
"... a Senate Judiciary subcommittee, chaired by Senator Cruz (a skeptic of the transition), will have a hearing on Wednesday at which both the [Obama] Administration and the new CEO of ICANN will appear. (I will be testifying as well, but on the second panel—the fireworks will be on the first panel, I'm sure.) What will come of this?  Only time will tell."--Paul Rosenzweig, The ICANN and IANA Transition End Game | LawfareBlog.com (emphasis added)
The IANA Stewardship Transition will be complete on October 1, 2016, unless House and Senate Republicans are successful in their effort to delay the transition and extend the IANA functions contract which will otherwise expire September 30, 2016. The Wednesday hearing was called by U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, the Subcommittee Chair, who opposes the IANA Stewardship Transition.

Hearing | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts: Protecting Internet Freedom: Implications of Ending U.S. Oversight of the Internet 

Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 Time: 10:00 AM EDT | LIVE video replay
Location: Dirksen Senate Office Building 226, Washington, D.C.
Presiding: Chairman Cruz

Witnesses:
Panel I
The Honorable Lawrence E. Strickling
Assistant Secretary For Communications And Information And Administrator
National Telecommunications And Information Administration (NTIA)
United States Department Of Commerce
Washington, DC
Download Testimony (pdf)

Mr. Göran Marby
CEO And President
Internet Corporation For Assigned Names And Numbers (ICANN)
Los Angeles, CA
Download Testimony (pdf)

Panel II
Mr. Berin Szoka
President
TechFreedom
Washington, DC
Download Testimony (pdf)

Mr. Jonathan Zuck
President
ACT The App Association
Washington, DC
Download Testimony (pdf)

Ms. Dawn GroveCorporate Counsel
Karsten Manufacturing
Phoenix, AZ
Download Testimony (pdf)

Ms. J. Beckwith ("Becky") Burr
Deputy General Counsel And Chief Privacy Officer
Neustar
Washington, DC
Download Testimony (pdf)

Mr. John Horton
President And CEO
LegitScript
Portland, Oregon
Download Testimony (pdf)

Mr. Steve DelBianco
Executive Director
NetChoice
Washington, DC
Download Testimony (pdf)

Mr. Paul Rosenzweig
Former Deputy Assistant Secretary For Policy
U.S. Department Of Homeland Security
Washington, DC
Download Testimony (pdf)

Subcommittee members
Republicans:
Senator Cruz, Chair
Senator Grassley
Senator Hatch
Senator Sessions
Senator Flake
Senator Graham
Senator Lee
Senator Vitter
Democrats:
Senator Coons, Ranking Member
Senator Feinstein
Senator Durbin
Senator Schumer
Senator Whitehouse
Senator Klobuchar
Senator Blumenthal

Member Statements: Senator Chuck Grassley R (IA) Download Statement (pdf)

See on Domain Mondo:
See also:  U.S. GAO - Department of Commerce--Property Implications of Proposed Transition of U.S. Government Oversight of Key Internet Technical Functions | gao.gov Sep 12, 2016: "... we find it is unlikely that either the authoritative root zone file or the Internet domain name system is U.S. Government property under Article IV.  We also find that the possible U.S. property interests that we have identified either would not be disposed of in connection with the proposed transition or would be disposed of in compliance with Article IV."

and U.S. GAO - National Telecommunications and Information Administration--Effect of Section 539 of the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016 on Amounts Appropriated Under a Continuing Resolution | gao.gov Sep 12, 2016: "... Section 539(b) provides that “Notwithstanding any other law, subsection (a) of this section shall not apply in fiscal year 2017.” However, section 539(b) would have no effect on the applicability of the prohibition contained in section 539(a) to funds appropriated by a typical continuing resolution. Therefore, NTIA could not use amounts appropriated under a continuing resolution to relinquish its responsibilities with respect to the Internet domain name systemHowever, during fiscal year 2017, section 539(b) extinguishes the prohibition of section 539(a) for any balances of the two-year appropriations (for fiscal years 2016 and 2017) enacted under the 2016 Appropriation that remain available for obligation in fiscal year 2017. Thus in fiscal year 2017 [beginning October 1, 2016] NTIA could use unobligated balances appropriated by the 2016 Appropriation to relinquish these responsibilities." (emphasis added)

and Comments on ICANN reform and the Stewardship Transition submitted by Milton Mueller, Internet Governance Project to the Senate Judiciary Committee, subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts, September 14, 2016 (pdf).


feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2016-08-17

NTIA Tells ICANN: IANA Functions Contract Will Expire October 1, 2016

Good news for those in support of ICANN operating without any governmental oversight--U.S. or otherwise--NTIA has told ICANN the current IANA functions contract between ICANN and NTIA will expire as of October 1, 2016:
Letter from NTIA's Larry Strickling to ICANN, August 16, 2016
Letter from NTIA's Larry Strickling to ICANN, August 16, 2016 
The corresponding ICANN announcement:
"... In a letter to ICANN today, NTIA stated, “NTIA has thoroughly reviewed the report. Based on that review, barring any significant impediment, NTIA intends to allow the IANA functions contract to expire as of October 1.
"ICANN is pleased with NTIA’s statement and is focused on the remaining tasks to be completed by 30 September 2016:
  • Finalize the PTI Bylaws: ICANN is currently incorporating comments received during the public comment process that ran from 12 July-11 August and will post a final version on 18 August.
  • Finalize the ICANN-PTI Naming Function Agreement, which includes the customer service complaint and escalation mechanisms defined by the CWG-Stewardship: This Agreement is currently out for public comment until 9 September 2016, and a final version will be posted on 16 September 2016.
  • Finalize the ICANN-PTI Services Agreement: The Agreement is currently being reviewed and discussed with the multistakeholder community, and a final version will be posted on 16 September 2016.
"In addition, there are four agreements and documents that have been finalized and require signatures, or ICANN Board and/or PTI Board approval before they can be considered complete:
  • The Root Zone Maintainer Agreement.
  • The ICANN-PTI Protocol Parameters Subcontracting Agreement.
  • The ICANN-PTI Numbers Subcontracting Agreement.
  • The PTI Conflict of Interest Policy, Board Code of Conduct, and Expected Standards of Behavior."
Larry Strickling, NTIA, also wrote on NTIA's blog:

Photo: NTIA's Lawrence E. Strickling
NTIA's Lawrence E. Strickling
Update on the IANA Transition
August 16, 2016 by Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling:

"Two months ago, we passed an important milestone in a nearly 20-year effort to privatize the Internet domain name system (DNS). We announced on June 9 that the transition proposal developed by the Internet multistakeholder community meets the criteria we outlined in March 2014 when we declared our intent to transition NTIA’s stewardship role related to the DNS. While this was a significant moment in this journey, we said in June that the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which currently operates the IANA functions under a contract with NTIA, still had work to do to implement key action items called for in the transition plan.

"On Friday, ICANN informed NTIA that it has completed or will complete all the necessary tasks called for in the transition proposal by the end of the contract term. NTIA has thoroughly reviewed the report. We informed ICANN today that based on that review and barring any significant impediment, NTIA intends to allow the IANA functions contract to expire as of October 1.

"The IANA stewardship transition represents the final step in the U.S. government’s long-standing commitment, supported by three Administrations, to privatize the Internet’s domain name system. For the last 18 years, the United States has been working with the global Internet multistakeholder community to establish a stable and secure multistakeholder model of Internet governance that ensures that the private sector, not governments, takes the lead in setting the future direction of the Internet’s domain name system. To help achieve this goal, NTIA in 1998 partnered with ICANN, a California-based nonprofit, to transition technical DNS coordination and management functions to the private sector. NTIA’s current stewardship role was intended to be temporary.

In March 2014, NTIA initiated the final step in the privatization of the DNS by asking ICANN to convene Internet stakeholders to develop a plan to transition NTIA’s stewardship role for the DNS to the Internet multistakeholder community. Stakeholders spent two years developing a thoughtful consensus proposal that meets the criteria we outlined in 2014 and will strengthen the multistakeholder approach, while maintaining the stability, security, and openness of the Internet that users across the globe depend on today. This multistakeholder model is the key reason why the Internet has grown and thrived as a dynamic platform for innovation, economic growth and free expression.

We appreciate the hard work and dedication of all the stakeholders involved in this effort and look forward to their continuing engagement."
(source: NTIA, U.S. Dept. of Commerce)(emphasis added)

See also on Domain MondoNews Review: ICANN Says It Is Ready for the IANA Transition, Is It Really? (14 August 2016)

See also: ICANN’s 31-page implementation planning status report (pdf).


feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2016-07-16

ICANN, NTIA, IANA Transition, Fundamental Problems, the Macro View

"We live a very complex world but we want simple answers.  What we end up doing is take a micro view of a situation because we have a sense we can grasp the problem better that way.  A macro view is more challenging because it requires you to handle more uncertainty."--Micro/Macro View | ceri.msu.edu (http://www.ceri.msu.edu/chatter/micromacro-view/).*


Above video is from IGF-USA 2016, July 14, 2016, program notes here.
Keynote: Larry Strickling, NTIA, US Dept. of Commerce (text of prepared remarks here).
Moderator: Shane Tews
Panelists:
  • Steve DelBianco, Executive Director, NetChoice
  • Gordon Goldstein, Managing Director - Head of External Affairs, SilverLake
  • John Kneuer, President and Founder of JKC Consulting LLC and Sr. Partner, Fairfax Media
  • Kristian Stout, Associate Director for Innovation Policy at the International Center for Law and Economics (ICLE)
  • Berin Szoka, President, TechFreedom
  • Jonathan Zuck, President, ACT
The above video will likely soon be forgotten, though it really shouldn't be, which is one reason Domain Mondo is publishing this post. It provides a snapshot of the IANA stewardship transition, plan and process, at this point in time. Pay particular attention to the concerns raised by some of the panelists.

As has been noted before on Domain Mondo, there are fundamental problems in the IANA stewardship transition, both in process and in substance, including ICANN accountability WS1 mechanisms. Here are some of the pros and cons (depending upon your point of view), of the Obama administration's (NTIA) IANA stewardship transition of U.S. government oversight to ICANN, a California corporation:
  • Solves (or at least is intended to solve) the U.S. government's problems in the wake of the Snowden revelations, including global criticism of the perceived role of  the U.S. government in the operation of the internet, thereby pre-empting a UN (or ITU) multilateral solution that would give governments a leading role;
  • Fulfills the promise of the U.S. government in 1998 to "privatize" and transition the US government's "historic stewardship role of internet oversight" to the "global multistakeholder community;"
  • False Narrative: the Obama administration (NTIA) bumbled the IANA transition from the beginning (March 2014) in two critical aspects: (1) NTIA pre-empted consideration of ICANN alternatives by the global internet community, and instead, in top-down fashion designated only ICANN, a California corporation and current IANA functions contractor, as the sole convener of the IANA transition planning process, thereby, in effect, pre-ordaining the end result and declaring ICANN to be the representative body of the "global multistakeholder community" and successor to NTIA in its "stewardship role." Unfortunately, as most knowledgeable people recognize, ICANN is not today, and never has been, truly representative of the global multistakeholder community ("massive power imbalance" within ICANN, absence of full global participation, a "broken" GNSO (ICANN's main policy-making body), etc.,--see News Review: ICANN, China, IANA: ex-CEO Fadi Chehadé's Sad Legacy). As a result, the IANA transition is already being dismissed and attacked globally as a U.S. government scheme to retain power and control over the internet; and (2) NTIA failed to recognize the extent of ICANN dysfunction and how much ICANN is not trusted, even by ICANN's own stakeholders, who in a rare moment of unanimity, insisted on adding an accountability (WS1) component to the IANA transition planning process, months after the NTIA announcement in March, 2014;
  • Immunity and Liability: once ICANN is operating "naked" without any contract from the U.S. government, or other sovereign authority, and lacking any operational status by way of statute or international treaty, such as that granted to the United Nations and its agencies, ICANN will no longer have the benefit of certain legal defenses based on U.S. law, including government contractor immunity, and may be subject to legal claims and liabilities anywhere a claimant asserts, and court affirms, jurisdiction.
  • Antitrust: as acknowledged by NTIA's Larry Stickling in the video above, ICANN "has always been and will continue to be subject to antitrust laws" of the United States (DOJ, FTC, and private antitrust actions), but with the U.S. government contract expiring, ICANN, as an unregulated global monopoly after September 30, 2016, as well as some of its "contracted parties," namely, the gTLD registry operators (each of which are granted exclusive global monopolies by ICANN), may be more likely to face antitrust actions in the future, not only in the U.S., but elsewhere.
  • Untested, unproven: none of the ICANN accountability mechanisms developed by the "ICANN community" in WS1 have yet been implemented, tested and proven. If the accountability mechanisms prove to be ineffective, there may be nothing either the U.S. government or ICANN community can do, leaving the global multistakeholder community with a dysfunctional, unaccountable ICANN.
  • Critical issues left to Work Stream 2 (WS2): work involving ICANN's jurisdiction and other issues was deferred to a later phase by ICANN and its CCWG-Accountability. The outcomes of WS2 will not be known until 2017, long after the IANA transition is complete.
The above list is not exhaustive, and others, such as U.S. Senators Cruz, Lankford, and Lee, have raised concerns related to foreign governments and free speech. Nevertheless, there is now little doubt that the Obama administration fully intends to allow the IANA functions contract expire on September 30, 2016. Caveat Emptor.

*For a further look at a micro/macro view comparison, with due credit to the Michigan State University source (first link above) and also to Peter Marber (petermarber.com):

Micro View:
  • Based on recency (present moment) or historic time biases; often failing to recognize changes in the environment, ecosystem, trends or indicators, or other new, evolving factors. Everything is predicated on the present or past perspective, even if past experience may no longer be applicable ("past success is no guarantee of future results"), or past policies no longer work (every economic model, every HFT algorithm, eventually fails);
  • Assumes larger degree of certainty and predictability than warranted; humans like certainty and often assume certainty, discounting risks, which has its own consequences. What is the level of information required, needed or even efficiently obtainable, before taking action?
  • Assumes, or locks-in, only one way;
  • Primary emphasis on control and concentrated power;
  • Cautious relationships, some participants (stakeholders) count less than others;
  • Policy changes are reactive not proactive;
  • Views issues as separate and compartmentalized, to be dealt with separately.
Macro View:
  • Forward time bias; tries to anticipate and think longer term;
  • Assumes more uncertainty, ambiguity and unpredictability; there is never a perfect answer or solution;
  • Many ways forward (more than one right way) depending on how one wants to arrange and rearrange the parts;
  • Influence is spread widely among a range of players;
  • Partnerships abound between countries, states as well as non-state agencies and others, such as non-profits (NGOs), education, business, and other interests or stakeholders;
  • Policy is proactive, involving many players, and evolving to fit the circumstances;
  • View issues as interrelated, integrative and global.

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2016-06-28

IANA Transition Premature say Grassley & Goodlatte in Letter to NTIA

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte on Monday, June 27, 2016, issued a press release (further below) and their letter (embed below) to NTIA concerning the proposed IANA stewardship transition now scheduled to occur upon expiration of the current IANA functions contract on September 30, 2016. Some of the questions posed by Senator Grassley and Congressman Goodlatte:
  • The transfer of government property without Congressional approval raises Constitutional issues and the prospect of illegality. The Government Accountability Office [GAO] is currently conducting a study to determine the United States Government’s property interest in the root zone file – or any other similar component of the Internet that was created and financed by the United States. The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) provides authoritative legal advice to the President and all Executive Branch agencies. Has NTIA requested OLC to analyze this issue concurrently with the GAO? If not, why?
  • Without the proper analysis regarding the United States Government property interest, it is premature to conduct any transition. Will NTIA commit to postpone any transition in the absence of a determination by GAO and OLC relating to this property issue?
  • Did NTIA inform other members of the DNS Interagency Working group of the transition related appropriations provision in the FY2106 Omnibus spending bill?
  • Why did NTIA proceed in utilizing funds in furtherance of the transition in light of the clear prohibition created by the FY2016 Omnibus spending bill?
  • ICANN’s revised bylaws make it clear that the Public Interest Commitments and the registry contracts that contain them are deemed within ICANN’s mission and not subject to a facial ultra vires challenge. However, some members of the multi-stakeholder community have expressed concern that the ICANN Board may not believe that mitigating certain types of DNS abuse, such as IP infringement, is within ICANN’s mandate. How will this proposal require ICANN’s commitment to maintaining and enforcing the Public Interest Commitments, now and in the future?
  • Is NTIA opposed to Congress requiring an affirmative, up-or-down vote for the IANA functions transition to be completed? Why or why not?

Press Release June 27, 2016 (emphasis added): Grassley, Goodlatte: Too Many Unanswered Questions in Plan to Transfer of Internet Authority

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte today raised concerns about Obama Administration efforts to relinquish stewardship of key internet functions in light of unanswered legal, constitutional and human rights questions. Other concerns include whether such a transition would jeopardize free expression on the Internet or weaken certain intellectual property protections.

In a letter to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the chairmen caution that the transition may violate the Constitution if it transfers government property to a private entity without congressional approval. The chairmen have sought clarification on whether the root zone file and similar components, which were created and financed by the U.S. government, constitute government property. They advise that transferring these components without congressional approval raises constitutional issues and the prospect of illegality.

“Despite NTIA’s intention of ending the United States government role, a number of important issues and concerns exist that indicate that this course is misguided or, at the very least, premature,” the chairmen said in the letter. “As we have stated previously, it is unfortunate that this proposal to eliminate the United States historical stewardship role over key internet management functions has been undertaken not because of technical considerations but for political ones.”

They raised concerns about a potential weakening of free expression and human rights protections by leaving terms such as “human rights” undefined and by increasing the authority of foreign governments, some of which have demonstrated a lack of commitment to human rights and an open internet. The chairmen also called into question the legality of the government’s continued work to pursue the transition, given provisions in recent government funding laws that prohibit taxpayer dollars from being used in furtherance of the transition, including proposal review and assessment.

The chairmen ask NTIA to respond to the questions raised in their letter and reiterate their commitment to ongoing oversight and examination of a potential transition of the internet authority. Full text of the letter follows [embedded below].

In the letter are a series of questions to which Senator Grassley and Congressman Goodlatte have requested a response from Larry Strickling, NTIA, no later than July 22, 2016:



feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2016-06-08

IANA Transition, NTIA and ICANN Exchange Form Over Substance Letters

Background:
RFC 2146 - U.S. Government Internet Domain Names May 1997: "The .GOV domain is delegated from the root authority to the US Federal Networking Council."
 RFC 1956 - Registration in the MIL Domain June 1996: "The ".MIL" domain is delegated from the root authority to the US Department of Defense (DoD). Only US military services, unified or specified commands, and operating agencies of the DoD which do not report through military service chains can be registered as a second level domain under the ".MIL" domain. All other DoD organizations will register through their respective second level domain administrators using the registration procedures established by those offices. The ".MIL" domain is administered by the DoD Network Information Center (NIC)."
The U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) administers TLDs .EDU and .US.
Note: at present the "root authority" is the U.S. government (U.S. Dept. of Commerce's NTIA). It is now clear that since at least March, 2014, NTIA has wanted to cede its "root authority" to ICANN, a California corporation incorporated on September 30, 1998, which first entered into an IANA Fuctions Contract with NTIA on February 9, 2000 (pdf), according to NTIA's IANA Functions Contract web page
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz and others in Congress have requested NTIA and the Obama administration to certify that they have secured "sole ownership" of the top-level domain names (TLDs) used by the U.S. government and the U.S. military, specifically, .GOV and .MIL, before any "IANA stewardship transition" occurs.

Form Over Substance:

Presumably in response to the requests of Senator Cruz and others in Congress, Larry Strickling of NTIA, and Goran Marby, President & CEO of ICANN, have traded letters (embedded below), signifying nothing but unenforceable promises that ICANN would notify NTIA of any re-delegation requests for gTLDs .GOV, .MIL, .EDU and ccTLD .US, in the future, and would obtain NTIA approval before taking action on any such re-delegation. Does anyone really think this will satisfy Ted Cruz et al in Congress, particularly in regard to .MIL and .GOV?

Neither Strickling nor Marby cite any binding authority to enforce these promises in the future nor are there any ICANN gTLD registry agreements with such terms to back this up for gTLDs .GOV, .MIL, or .EDU.

As previously remarked on Domain Mondo:
"One easy solution to the above quandary, which most .COM domain name registrants would favor, would be to reclassify the legacy gTLDs (per RFC 1591) .COM, .NET, .ORG, .EDU, .GOV, .MIL as ccTLDs assigned to the U.S. (which historically, in practice (pdf), they always have been), with a mutual declaration by all parties, including the respective registry operators, U.S. government, and ICANN, that .COM, .NET, and .ORG will remain, in perpetuity, open ccTLDs for registration and use by the entire global internet community. In addition, the only other "legacy gTLD" per RFC 1591, .INT, should be assigned to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) [domain name: itu.int], an international UN agency, for TLD operation and administration, a role which ITU has been ready, willing and able to take on since at least 2003. ITU was involved in the founding of ICANN in 1998 and participates in ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). Current registry operator of .INT is IANA, a department of ICANN, which is a blatant conflict of interest."

NTIA letter:


ICANN letter (highlighting added):



feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2016-05-20

IANA & ICANN: Cruz, Lankford & Lee Letter to Pritzker & Strickling

Senate Commerce Hearing on ICANN & IANA Transition, LIVE, Tuesday, May 24 at 10am ET

Embedded below is U.S. Senators Cruz, Lankford & Lee's May 19th letter to U.S. Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker and NTIA's Larry Strickling concerning the IANA Stewardship Transition proposal currently under review by NTIA.

The letter touches on several hot-button issues, including:
  • endangerment of internet freedom;
  • power of foreign governments over the internet under the proposal;
  • opening the door to regulation of internet content;
  • transfer of U.S. government property issues;
  • ICANN's U.S. jurisdiction subject to change after the transition;
  • an unaccountable ICANN Board of Directors;
  • ICANN ex-CEO Fadi Chehade's failure to respond to specific questions about his involvement with the Chinese government's World Internet Conference;
  • other issues unaddressed by the proposal, including future of .mil and .gov TLDs, ICANN's antitrust status, ICANN's potential to "impose global taxes" without U.S. government oversight;
and the letter concludes: "In light of all these concerns and the magnitude of the potential consequences, we respectfully request that you extend NTIA's IANA functions contract with ICANN."



See also on Domain Mondo:




DISCLAIMER

2016-03-31

Domain Names, New gTLDs, Present & Future Perspectives, SSIG Video

SSIG 2016:

Video above: Session on Domain Names, New gTLDs, Present & Future Perspectives

The Eighth South School on Internet Governance (SSIG) held at the Organization of American States (OAS) Headquarters in Washington, D.C.

Thursday, March 31, 2016, late afternoon agenda:

15:30 EDT | 3:30pm EDT Present and future perspectives of domain names – New gTLDs
  • Philipp Grabensee, Chairman of the Board of Directors, Afilias
  • Byron Holland, President and CEO, Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA)
  • Keith Drazek, Vice President of Public Policy & Government Relations, Verisign
  • Samanta Demetriu, Vice President of Consulting & Strategy, FairWinds Partners
  • Daniel Fink, Stakeholder Engagement, Sr., Manager Brazil, ICANN
  • Moderator: Olga Cavalli, Academic Director, South School on Internet Governance
17:00 EDT | 5:00pm EDT [not on video]
Welcoming Remarks - Lawrence E. Strickling, Assistant Secretary for Communications and
Information and Administrator, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce


More info: http://www.gobernanzainternet.org/   | Twitter: https://twitter.com/hashtag/SSIGOAS




DISCLAIMER

2016-03-19

Larry Strickling Et Al: Internet Governance in a Post-American World (video)


Passing the Torch: How Will Internet Governance Change in a Post-American World? - "How the Internet is governed will change significantly in the year ahead, as the U.S. government anticipates relinquishing its oversight of key technical functions to ICANN and China launches a competing institution to encourage greater state control of the Internet. This creates significant uncertainty and raises important questions for stakeholders around the world. Does ICANN have the institutional capacity and leadership ability to take on its new role? How will the rapidly changing environment impact Internet policy in coming years? And who will be the biggest winners and losers?" Streamed LIVE on March 17, 2016. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), Washington D.C. -- Domain Name: itif.org

Comments from the panel: 

Zuck: "The [multistakeholder] process is an ugly process ... the fact that everyone is dissatisfied with this [IANA Transition & ICANN Accountability] proposal is a testament to its success ... there is no one that is happy with everything in this proposal"

Sheckler: "The Devil is in the Details"

Panelists:
Lawrence E. Strickling
Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and Administrator
National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce
Speaker

Daniel Castro
Vice President
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Moderator

Jamie Hedlund
Vice President, Strategic Programs, Global Domain Division
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Presenter

Victoria Sheckler
Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel
Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)
Presenter

Chris Wilson
Vice President, Government Affairs
21st Century Fox Corporation
Presenter

Jonathan Zuck
President
ACT | The App Association
Presenter




DISCLAIMER

2016-03-11

ICANN Board Transmits IANA Transition Plan, What Happens Next?

Now that the IANA stewardship transition plan has been transmitted by the ICANN Board of Directors to the U.S. Department of Commerce (NTIA), what will happen once the plan is received in Washington, D.C.? Read the remarks of Larry Strickling, NTIA (excerpt and in full below), at the ICANN-GAC Meeting, Marrrakech--

Lawrence E. Strickling, NTIA
Remarks of Larry Strickling, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information, at the ICANN GAC High Level Governmental Meeting, Marrakech, Morocco, on March 7, 2016, (emphasis added)--

"I am pleased to be here today at the third GAC High Level Governmental Meeting ... Assuming final approval of the plan by chartering organizations in the next couple of days, we expect the [ICANN] Board to transmit the proposal to us this week. Once we receive the transition proposal, we will review it, hopefully within 90 days, to ensure it meets the criteria we outlined when we announced the transition. Let me remind all of you of the specific conditions that we said that the plan must satisfy. First, the proposal must support and enhance the multistakeholder model of Internet governance, in that it should be developed by the multistakeholder community and have broad community support. More specifically, we will not accept a transition proposal that replaces the NTIA role with a government-led or intergovernmental organization solution. Second, the proposal must maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the domain name system. Third, it must meet the needs and expectations of the global customers and partners of the IANA services. And finally, it must maintain the openness of the Internet. As promptly as we can, we will carefully evaluate the proposal and measure it against the criteria. In this effort, we will be joined by other agencies of the U.S. government that will be impacted by the transition. We will also follow the recommendations of the U.S. General Accountability Office. The U.S. Congress has a strong interest in this proposal and we expect Congress to closely monitor and review the proposal as well as our evaluation of the plan...."

Full remarks of Ass't Sec. Strickling:



Note: Implementation has already started within ICANN in anticipation the plan will be approved--read more at ICANN: IANA Stewardship Transition Implementation.

Also note the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee's Communications and Technology Subcommittee has scheduled an IANA Transition Hearing for March 17.


2016-02-26

NETmundial Initiative, WEF and ICANN Withdrawal, Consequences

UPDATE: Comments of Larry Strickling (US Department of Commerce, NTIA) at the NETmundial Initiative meeting in Madrid (as reported by Samantha Dickinson):
UPDATE: The NETmundial Initiative (NMI) meeting in Madrid has concluded, and a Communique issued which includes the following points:
  • Funding by the founding 'partners' ICANN, World Economic Forum (WEF), and CGI.br ends June 30, 2016 [ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade announced at the meeting that the new ICANN CEO and the ICANN Board will determine at a later date whether to continue any funding beyond June 30th. Chehade also announced his resignation from the NMI Coordination Council effective March 13, 2016].
  • The Council considered and accepted a proposal for CGI.br to provide an institutional home for the ongoing initiative, subject to approval by CGI.br’s Board.  
  • The Council discussed the possibility of changing its current structure following a broad community consultation. 
  • The current open request for nominations to the Coordination Council is withdrawn. Once the public consultation is complete, a new nomination process will begin.  
  • Two activities were proposed for 2016, sponsorship for which has already been secured: (1) Document a set of good practices for national multistakeholder Internet governance structures and mechanisms; (2) Pilot the application of such practices in sub-Saharan Africa, including a conference to share learnings from pilot participants.
  • A follow-up meeting of the Coordination Council will be held in Brussels, Belgium, on 8 June 2016. 
[--end of UPDATE--]

NETmundial Initiative: "Council members are currently considering the future direction of the NETmundial Initiative, and will make decisions at the Council's face-to-face meeting in Madrid, Spain, on 26 February 2016. In the meanwhile the nomination process for a new Council announced previously is on hold pending the outcome of that meeting."

NETmundial Initiative Coordination Council2nd Face to Face Meeting, Madrid, Spain
Date: 26 Feb 2016 - Remote Participation: Adobe Connect Room.

AGENDA - times shown below are UTC:

08:00 - 08:30 Welcoming Remarks from Host, Co-Chairs Overview of Achievements.
Moderator: Eileen Donahoe

08:30 - 10:00 WEF [World Economic Forum] & ICANN Withdrawal: Financial & Political Consequences; Looking Forward - A quick reality check; value of NETmundial; order of magnitude of costs; potential new partners, etc. This session is meant to inform the next sessions.
Moderator: Jean-Jacques Subrenat
10:00 - 10:15 | Break

10:15 - 12:00 Moving Forward - Share and explore feasibility of ideas presented in the non-paper and subsequent CGI.br position paper; relationship with the IGF.
Moderator: Wolfgang Kleinwächter
12:00 - 13:30 | Lunch

Afternoon Agenda TBD - to be determined based on work of morning sessions
13:30 - 14:30
14:30 - 14:45 | Break
14:45 - 15:30
15:30 - 16:00 NMI Roadmap Post June 2016
Moderator: Marilia Maciel
16:00 - 16:15 | Approval of Communique

Background:
The NETmundial Initiative (NMI) was one of  ICANN President and CEO Fadi Chehade's personal pet projects while on "ICANN's dime" (Fadi is Co-Chair, as is Jack Ma and others), reportedly funded (in part) by ICANN, though NMI has never received wide support from either the global internet community, nor the "ICANN community"--see NETmundial Initiative Lacks Backing, and ICANN Should Not Lead and other sources below. See also this ICANN Documentary Information Disclosure Policy Request (pdf) and Response (pdf).

See on Domain Mondo:
NetMundial Initiative (NMI) - (Wikipedia): "The NMI was launched in on 6 November 2014 in a
partnership between the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br) and the World Economic Forum (WEF). Its Inaugural Coordination Council consisted of 23 members ... Leading up to and following the initial scoping meeting of NMI in Geneva, Switzerland in August 2014, several actors in the broader Internet governance ecosystem expressed concerns over NMI's proposed organization and activities. Concerns intensified following the official launch in November of that year. ISOC, the IAB and ICC BASIS published statements outlining their concerns ... According to Julia Pohle in the Global Policy Journal, there were three main controversial issues surrounding NMI raised by civil society and the technical community: permanent seats on the NMI Council, potential interference with the UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and concern over disproportionate involvement in decision-making by economic and political elite. NMI retracted the notion of permanent seats on the Council, committed to supporting the efforts of the IGF and generated Internet Governance Process Principles to comprehensively address concerns regarding adherence to bottom-up, multistakeholder consensus-driven governance."

#netmundial



DISCLAIMER

2016-02-09

How ICANN and ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé Evade Accountability

Something is rotten in ICANN and the old saying is the rot starts at the top. Embedded below, and here (pdf), is the Editor of Domain Mondo's interchange with ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé in October, 2015, at the ICANN54 Public Forum, and follow-up by ICANN staff in January, 2016, in advance of the ICANN Quarterly Stakeholder call. A copy of the interchange below has been sent to Penny Pritzker, U.S. Commerce Secretary, Larry Strickling (NTIA), and a few others. One can only conclude and surmise from all of this:
1) ICANN intentionally nurtures conflicts of interest as its normal way of doing business (question 1 below);
2) In regard to 21st Century Fox's Rick Lane's questions at ICANN54 Public Forum and ICANN's non-responses below, it is possible ICANN has been paying $$ to influence foreign governments and others outside the U.S. [the two links provided by James Cole of ICANN below are not responsive. The inquiry is not directed to ICANN's U.S. government lobbying, but instead, ICANN's activities outside the U.S., the specifics of which ICANN refuses to disclose]. 


Final note: on January 28, 2016, Mike Silber, ICANN Board Member responded by email:
"Hi John
On 27/01/2016 20:12, John Poole wrote: [DomainMondo.com Editor’s Note: Question was submitted via email, October 21, 2015 (US time), approximately 12 hours before the Public Forum commenced.] Thank you for the clarification. Let me see if those type of questions (dense, but well thought out) can be easily accessed prior to the start of the public forum, so we don't deflect."

Now that ICANN and ICANN President and CEO Fadi Chehade have been called to account by U.S.Senators Cruz, Lankford, and Lee, it will be interesting to see how ICANN and its CEO try to avoid the truth and evade accountability, once again. To get full answers to the questions raised above will, apparently, require a U.S. Senate or House investigation, and a Federal Government Audit--Federal Government Contractors are subject to audits performed by a U.S.Government agency such as the Government Accountability Office (GAO)--as well as an IRS (Internal Revenue Service) audit of ICANN's finances for the entire time (2012-2016) Fadi Chehade has been President and CEO of ICANN.

Frankly, none of this bodes well for the IANA stewardship transition. The "accountability mechanisms" proposed by the hardworking sub-group of the ICANN community (CCWG-Accountability) though well-intentioned, are immensely inferior to the accountability mechanisms of the U.S. government as indicated above. Add to that the inept or mostly passive ICANN Board of Directors who allow ICANN staff to run unchecked under the leadership of a CEO unqualified for the position--who himself carved out most of the core functions of ICANN (including the critical IANA functions--see below) into a new "Global Domains Division" (GDD) and put his crony who got him the job at ICANN in charge--allowing the CEO to spend most of his time globetrotting, dabbling in geo-politics, and self-promotion--setting himself up for his post-ICANN career "portfolio".

ICANN organizational chart, p. 5 (pdf) 06/01/2015: The IANA department is part of the Global Domains Division (GDD)
Elise Gerich, VP of IANA, reports to Akram Atallah, GDD President, who reports to ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade
Next post on Domain Mondo: Is ICANN Too Broken To Be Reformed? A Question from CCWG Mail List

See also on Domain Mondo:



DISCLAIMER

2016-01-29

State of the Net: Internet Governance, IANA Transition, EU Safe Harbor


International Perspectives of the State of Governance on the Internet (56 mins) with Larry Strickling, Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information, United States Department of Commerce, NTIA; and Bertrand de la Chapelle, Director, Internet & Jurisdiction Project. 
MODERATOR: Cheryl Miller, Director, International Public Policy and Regulatory Affairs, Verizon.


High Noon for the IANA Transition (63 mins) PANEL: Steve Crocker, Chair of the ICANN Board of Directors; Alissa Cooper, Distinguished Engineer, Cisco; Steve DelBianco, Executive Director, NetChoice; David Redl, Counsel, U.S House Committee on Energy and Commerce; Greg Shatan, Partner, Abelman Frayne & Schwab; Chris Wilson, Vice President, Government Affairs, 21st Century Fox. MODERATOR: Laura DeNardis American University


The Collapse of the EU Safe Harbor: Assessing the Damage and Exploring Solutions (59 mins) INTRODUCTION: Justin Antonipallai, Counselor to the Secretary with Delegated Duties of Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, U.S. Department of Commerce; PANEL: Andrea Glorioso, Counselor, Delegation of the European Union to the U.S.; Bijan Madhani, Public Policy & Regulatory Counsel, Computer & Communications Industry Association; Meg Jones, Assistant Professor, Georgetown University; MODERATOR: Kelly A. DeMarchis, Counsel, Venable LLP.

See also: Europe’s Top Digital-Privacy Watchdog Zeros In on U.S. Tech Giants - The New York Times".... A number of digital-rights advocates, including Mr. Schrems, are also preparing new privacy cases if a data-transfer deal is not reached by Feb. 1. That will most likely cause more problems for American tech giants, pushing Ms. Falque-Pierrotin and her European counterparts to consider new investigations — and, eventually, fines. But her position on protecting personal data continues to appear unwavering. “Does the U.S. provide sufficient privacy guarantees?” she said. “Until now, the answer is no.”"

more info:



DISCLAIMER

Domain Mondo archive