Showing posts with label UN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UN. Show all posts

2019-06-10

Launch of the Report of the High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation

Launch of the Report of the High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation

  Report of the High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation

LIVE Event June 10, 2019:
 Launch of the High Level Panel on Digital Cooperation’s Report
Monday, June 10, 2019, 10:45 - 11:30 am EDT, New York City, NY (US).
"The High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation was established by United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres to advance a dialogue on strengthening international cooperation in the digital age."
The High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation will launch its final report on Monday 10 June 2019. To mark the occasion, join a live conversation on digital cooperation with:
Moderated by international broadcast journalist, Femi Oke.

The LIVE webcast will begin at 10:45am EST and will be streaming on multiple channels, including:
"This global online event is an opportunity to discuss how the public sector, private sector and civil society can work together to realize the potential of digital technologies for advancing human well-being, while mitigating the risks. Communities, organizations and individuals working on issues ranging from digital inclusion, digital rights & security, governance and more are encouraged to tune in and join the online conversation during the broadcast." 
More information here. | #digitalcooperation  | email: digitalcooperation @ unops.org

Later Event: June 11: The Age of Digital Interdependence: The Launch of the Report of the UN Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation


feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2018-10-07

News Review | GDPR, EPDP, and ICANN WHOIS Data Liability

graphic "News Review" ©2016 DomainMondo.com
Domain Mondo's weekly internet domain news review (NR 2018-10-07 with analysis and opinion: Features •  1) GDPR, EPDP, and ICANN WHOIS Data Liability,  2)Other ICANN news: KSK Roll Oct 11, and more, 3) a. Malicious Domains, b..COM Domainers re: Verisign, NTIA & ICANN, c. WIPO Workshop, and more, 4) ICYMI Internet Domain News, 5) Most Read.

1) GDPR, EPDP, and ICANN WHOIS Data Liability
ICANN EPDP Meetings this coming week Tuesday Oct 9, and Wednesday Oct 10 (small group), and Thursday Oct 11: 2 meetings, see below. Non-members of the EPDP working group can follow these meetings via Adobe Connect, or audio cast via browser or application. Links to all EPDP meetings' transcripts and recordings are on the GNSO calendar. Other EPDP links: wiki, mail list, action items, Temp Spec, EPDP Charter (pdf), GNSO's EPDP page and updates.

Recording, Attendance & AC chat (Editor's note: the correct Adobe Connect replay link) for the EPDP call to discuss Independent legal counsel to assist the EPDP working group held on Wednesday, 10 October 2018 at 22:00 UTC. Chat transcript (pdf).

Thursday Oct 11 EPDP small group (agenda, links to chat transcript, Adobe Connect replay, MP3), 17:00 UTC (1pm EDT). Natural person vs legal entity 11 Oct 2018 (pdf).

Thursday Oct 11 EPDP Meeting (agenda, links to chat transcript, Adobe Connect replay, MP3), 13:00 UTC (9am EDT). Purpose B workbook (pdf); Meeting Transcript (pdf).

Wednesday Oct 10 small group (agenda, links to chat, Adobe replay, MP3), Small Team #3 relevant input (pdf), upd Background Info (pdf). This Small Group's working document:

Tuesday Oct 9 EPDP meeting wiki link (agenda), chat transcript (pdf), MP3, Adobe Connect replay,  Lawful Basis Memo (pdf); data elements workbook (including Purpose A), work products (pdfs) in relation to agenda item three: Data Elements Matrix, Purpose A,  Purpose M, Purpose N.  The meeting's focus was on Purpose A, leaving no time for Purposes M & N which also might involve transfer of Registrant data from Registrar to the Registry.

Editor's note: the ICANN EPDP working group grinds on under the inept 'leadership' of former ICANN 'Chief Strategy Officer' Kurt Pritz (appointed EPDP Chair by the GNSO Council), who has apparently been supplanted by CBI.org facilitators Gina Bartlett and David Plumb, when available, in leading EPDP meeting discussions:
Kurt Pritz, EPDP Chair: "I want to welcome David Plumb [CBI.org facilitator] who's on the call who will lead those discussion items. So I'm pretty darn pleased with that."  EPDP Oct 4 meeting, p.3.
Highlights from EPDP meetings last week (ending Oct 5):
Emily Taylor (RrSG): "Just to support Lindsay Hamilton-Reid’s remarks, in practice the technical contacts are often are all almost always duplicates of other contacts. If there’s a technical issue with a domain name there are two possible courses. One is contact the registrant and one is contract the registrar. Both of those details are in separate fields .... my own personal view is that these ancillary fields admin technical billing are all sort of relic from the old Whois format which is, you know, desired way back when in the 80s before there was really a hard concept of a domain name registrant having rights and responsibilities and before there was ever such a thing as a registrar. The market has moved on considerably and the Whois fields have not kept up to date. It’s way past the time where we have a good look at these fields and ... get rid of [some of] them entirely." [EPDP Oct 2 meeting, p. 38] 
Editor's note: My view is the same as Ms. Taylor's re: admin and technical contacts in the WHOIS directory. That kind of information, like billing contacts and credit card information, if needed at all, should only be held by and between the registrar and registrant. The WHOIS directory is like the Registrar's Office of real estate deeds showing who is the legal owner, or in the case of domain names, the domain name holder (registrant) of record. When you buy a car, the government agency that issues auto license plates, doesn't ask you who your mechanic (or 'technical contact') is, does it? My suggestion for revised WHOIS registrant data fields is here (pdf).
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG): "... The current educational resources/registrants rights and responsibilities package has been neglected for years ... Registrars should have procedures in place to inform registrants of their constitutional and charter rights, as well as their rights under GDPR ... note that the registrars will be held accountable for how well informed the individual [registrant] is. If they give away their rights because they were not well informed, it will be the registrars fault ... Caution is required here ... if civil society were to sue under the GDPR, in my view (remember, I am not even a lawyer let alone a litigator) the strategy would be to go for ICANN as data controller  responsible for the policy, and the registrar as data controller for the client relationship data." [EPDP Oct 3 chat, p.3]
Thomas Rickert (ISPCP): "Regarding a direct contract between ICANN and registrants: We are to review to the TS [temporary specification] and not to recreate a completely new gTLD world." Emily Taylor (RrSG): "Well said @Thomas." [EPDP Oct 4 chat, p. 3]
Stephanie Perrin (NCSG): "It is very very clear that the purpose of the GDPR is to address the imbalance of power in the data relationships of the Information Society." [EPDP Oct 4 chat, p.7]
 Questions for ICANN Org from EPDP meeting Oct 4, 2018:
  1. ICANN org should have a general retention policy. As part of its GDPR-compliant data processing regime. If so, can this be provided to the EPDP Team?
  2. We have spent most of this meeting exploring the role of compliance at ICANN, in order to support a proposal that ICANN has an implicit contract with the registrant and that therefore 6 1 b applies as a grounds for processing.  This would also facilitate ICANN operating a UAM on behalf of those who want the data.  It might also explain Goran’s [Marby, ICANN CEO] initiative in seeking some kind of recognition by EU authorities that ICANN has a kind of quasi-regulator status, as the authority vested with the responsibility to manage the DNS.  Given that all of this is outside the current configuration of ICANN as data controller, which would be more clear had we done a DPIA and had we adequate data maps to work with….can we either get back to our Charter questions that we were mandated to address by the GNSO, or get a full explanation of what is going on and why we continue to be focused on the access question? [emphasis and links added]
  3. Is there a date limit for ICANN accepting a complaint or request to audit regarding a registration that has been deleted? If not, what is the case of the longest period of a deleted registration that was accepted and acted upon?
Request for independent legal counsel to assist the EPDP from  RySG (Registries Stakeholder Group), RrSG (Registrar Stakeholder Group), and NCSG (Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group)--Letter October 5, 2018 (pdf).

26 Sep 2018 Letter from Registrar Stakeholder Group (RrSG) to ICANN CEO Göran Marby, ICANN Board Chairman Cherine Chalaby, and ICANN DPO Daniel Halloran (pdf) published by ICANN 4 Oct 2018, embed below (Editor's note: read this carefully):

More info on Oct 2-5 EPDP meetings on last week's News Review.
Photo of ICANN CEO Goran Marby, with words below:" ICANN's  GDPR Train Wreck"  ©2018 DomainMondo.com
Definition of "train wreck" -- a chaotic or disastrous situation that holds a peculiar fascination for observers.
Note also:
  • ICANN Webinar (one hour) data protection/privacy (GDPR) update now scheduled for Oct 8, 2018, 15:00 UTC (11am EDT) via Adobe Connect. Dial-in info, questions, etc., here. 
UPDATE: Question asked: :Why hasn’t a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) been carried out to clarify data flows and ICANN’s relationship with the data subject in light of its acknowledged role as a joint controller and Article 35 of the GDPR?
RESPONSE: This question was also asked during the Data Protection/Privacy Update Webinar hosted by ICANN org on 8 October 2018. John Jeffrey, ICANN’s General Counsel and Secretary provided the following response:
“This is something that has been considered since the very beginning. One of the issues is when to do that in a way that is most timely and useful and how to do that. We continue to evolve the thinking of how the interpretation of GDPR applies to WHOIS. We have a number of questions which have been addressed directly to the DPAs and the EDPB and we’ve have an ongoing discussion with the EC about how to interpret the GDPR. We believe that those are a better format at this point than doing the assessment, but we continue to evaluate whether that assessment would be the right thing to do and when.”
ICANN 8 Oct 2018 Webinar replay (Adobe Connect & audio) and presentation (slides) here.
  • Pre-ICANN63 Policy Open House webcast: Thursday, 11 October 2018, 10:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC. The open house will run in English with simultaneous Spanish interpretation. The presentation materials will be translated into Spanish, and posted following the open house with the recordings of the sessions here. Register via this form by 8 Oct 2018. More info here. ICANN63 Full Schedule.

2) Other ICANN News
graphic "ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers"
a. KSK Roll October 11--the change or "roll" of the cryptographic key for the internet DNS root on 11 October 2018. "It will mark the first time the key has been changed since it was first put in use in 2010"--ICANN.org. More information here and here (pdf).

b. ICANN Board Report September 2018 (pdf)
Board Report Sep 2018
"... we held an Executive Team retreat in Visby, Sweden from 23-26 July."--Goran Marby, ICANN President & CEO (p. 3). Editor's note: No disclosure of the itemized and total costs paid by ICANN org for this annual extravagance.

c. If you think ICANN, notwithstanding its incompetence, conflicts of interest, and/or corruption, has a viable future, you may be interested in the ICANN Board and organization webinar on 9 October 2018 at 14:00 UTC (10am EDT) on ICANN strategic planning. More info here.

d. End of the Line: "Resolved (2018.10.03.02), the Board directs the President and CEO, or his designee(s), that the pending application for .HALAL and the pending application for .ISLAM not proceed ... Resolved (2018.10.03.01), the Board adopts the portion of the IRP Panel's recommendation that the application for .PERSIANGULF submitted in the current new gTLD round not proceed and directs the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to take all steps necessary to implement this decision."--Approved Board Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board 03 Oct 2018.

e.  ICANN's new gTLD .BRAND Extortion Racket losing more: .epost and .bond. terminating.

3) Names, Domains & Trademarks
graphic "Names, Domains & Trademarks" ©2017 DomainMondo.com
a. Malicious Domains: "using a cooling-off period for domain names can help catch those registered by known bad actors"--DarkReading.com.

b. .COM Domainers re: Verisign, NTIA & ICANN--StopThePriceIncreaseOf.com.

c. WIPO Advanced Workshop on Domain Name Dispute Resolution: Update on Precedent and Practice, Geneva, Switzerland, Tuesday and Wednesday, October 9 and 10, 2018.

d. Domainers Lament "Too many domains, no buyers"--Everyone Trying to Sell Their Portfolios but NOBODY is Buying Them. Now What? | ricksblog.com.

e. Alphabet’s new domain name tool could limit malware, censorship, and spying--internet domain lookups are typically unencrypted, meaning hackers and governments can manipulate them to block certain sites or serve up malware--FastCompany.com.

4) ICYMI Internet Domain News 
graphic "ICYMI Internet Domain News" ©2017 DomainMondo.com
UPDATE on the UN Secretary-General's High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation @UNSGdigicoop:
  • Censorship could be just as common in an open internet as a closed one--qz.com.
  • China: Why Would Google’s Ex-CEO Predict a Separate Chinese Internet?--nymag.com
  • Zambia’s social media tax isn’t really about social media or freedom of speech--qz.com
  • India: Reactions to the Aadhaar Judgement--internetfreedom.in; See also indianexpress.com: Surveillance after the Aadhaar judgment: What Internet freedom?
  • Internet: Inside the Harvard research hub chronicling our relationship with the internet--siliconrepublic.com.

5) Most Read Posts this past week on DomainMondo.com: 
graphic "Domain Mondo" ©2017 DomainMondo.com



-- John Poole, Editor • Domain Mondo 

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2018-03-22

ICANN & GDPR Thursday Session at WSIS Forum 2018, Geneva (video)

WSIS – 15 years of impact:

ITU video above published Mar 2, 2018: The WSIS Forum is constantly evolving and strengthening the alignment between the WSIS Action Lines and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The 2018 Forum will serve as a key platform for discussing the role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) as a means of implementation of the SDGs and targets, with due regard to the global mechanism for follow-up and review of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Highlights Video #1: WSIS FORUM 2018

ITU video above published Mar 19, 2018: First highlights video from the WSIS FORUM 2018, ITU, Geneva, Switzerland.
More than 2,500 information and communication technology (ICT) experts from around the globe are in Geneva for the World Summit on the Information Society Forum 2018 (WSIS Forum 2018), which runs March 19-23, and is co-organized by ITU (itu.int), UNESCO (unesco.org), UNCTAD (unctad.org) and UNDP (undp.org), in close collaboration with all UN agencies.

WSIS Forum 2018 is focusing on sustainable development trends and inclusive ICT initiatives in key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) priority areas such as health, hunger, education, youth inclusion, employment, gender empowerment, the environment, infrastructure and innovation. Participants include at least 500 high-level policy-makers from 150+ countries, including government ministers and experts, civil society leaders, academics, business leaders and international organizations.

Agenda | WSIS Forum 2018 (with links to LIVE & replay video)

Highlighted Thursday March 22, 2018, sessions (all times CET):
  • Session 197 | WSIS Forum 2018: ICANN, Data Protection and the GDPR: 16:30–18:15 [starts 11:30 am EDT (US)] Proposed Agenda: 1) Introductions and Objectives of Workshop – Moderator Tarek Kamel, ICANN 5m; 2) ICANN and GDPR  - A way forward for WHOIS  - Theresa Swinehart, ICANN 30m; 3) Global Data Protection Developments; 4) Roundtable discussion on Data Protection and GDPR  40m; 5) Wrap up 5m.
See also Friday's session Session 138 | WSIS Forum 2018: ICANN, the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) and Capacity Building: 09:00–10:45, Friday, 23 March 2018.

Recent correspondence from ITU Secretary-General to ICANN CEO:


feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2018-02-04

News Review | GDPR & ICANN WHOIS: "We're all Europeans now"

graphic "News Review" ©2016 DomainMondo.com
Domain Mondo's weekly internet domain news review (NR 2018-02-04) with analysis and opinion: Features •  1) GDPR & ICANN WHOIS: "We're all Europeans now",  2) Other ICANN news, 3) Names, Domains & Trademarks: a. Collapse in new gTLDs' Domain Name Registrations Continues into 2018, b. ccTLD .au, c. Verisign $VRSN Q4 2017 4) ICYMI Internet Domain News, 5) Most Read.

1. EU GDPR & ICANN WHOIS: "We're all Europeans now"
GDPR Summary of Important Aspects | Eureka.eu: "The EU General Data Protection Regulation is the world's biggest change to information security ever and is poised to export Europe's data protection and data privacy principles to the rest of the world."
The European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) becomes enforceable on May 25, 2018, and marks the biggest overhaul of personal data privacy rules in the history of the internet, directly impacting ICANN and its "contracted parties" (gTLD registry operators and registrars), who are considered "controllers" of domain name registrants' personal data.
The 2006 Definition of Whois Purpose: Case study of the “bad old days” in ICANN | InternetGovernance.org: "... the legal situation is changing in ways that make it difficult, if not impossible, to keep evading the issue ..."
WHAT IS Going to Happen With WHOIS? | Motherboard.vice.com: "... an overhaul of this nearly 30-year-old protocol [WHOIS] is long overdue. The notion that individual data should require a requester to also provide their own data is both equitable and intuitive—the only remaining question is how to make it work."
Diagram of interim models presented at ICANN webinar Feb 2, 2018
Editor's note: a webinar was conducted by ICANN management on Friday, February 2, 2018, which I attended along with more than 300 other stakeholders, and learned:
  1. ICANN acknowledges it is a "controller" subject to the EU's GDPR law;
  2. ICANN acknowledges that the GDPR law is a "compliance issue" for the ICANN organization, not a policy issue, and that ICANN org is working on a single, global model, for complying with the GDPR;
  3. According to ICANN CEO Goran Marby, ICANN is "working around the clock" and hopes to have more information about its "model" by mid-February;
  4. Here's a work paper explaining differences between the models.
Legal Analyses, Proposed Compliance Models, & Community Feedback | ICANN.org:

29 January 2018 Rafik Dammak NCSG Policy Committee Chair, Non Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG), re: ICANN-Proposed Compliance Models Comments (pdf, 330KB) excerpt (emphasis added):
Our evaluation of the models offered by ICANN are based on three fundamental principles. No model that fails to conform to all three is acceptable to the NCSG.
1. The purpose of whois must be strictly tied to ICANN's mission. That is, the data that is collected and the data that are published must directly and demonstrably contribute to ICANN's mission as defined in Article 1 of its new bylaws. We reject any definition of Whois purpose that is based on the way people happen to make use of data that can be accessed indiscriminately in a public directory. The fact that certain people currently use Whois for any purpose does not mean that the purpose of Whois is to provide thick data about the domain and its registrant to anyone who wants it for any reason.
2. Whois service, like the DNS itself, should be globally uniform and not vary by jurisdiction. ICANN was created to provide globalized governance of the DNS so that it would continue to be globally compatible and coordinated. Any solution that involves fragmenting the policies and practices of Whois along jurisdictional lines is not desirable.
3. No tiered access solution that involves establishing new criteria for access can feasibly be created in the next 3 months. We would strongly resist throwing the community into a hopeless rush to come up with entirely new policies, standards and practices involving tiered access to data, and we do not want ICANN staff to invent a policy that is not subject to community review and approval. Based on these three principles, we believe that Model 3 is the only viable option available.
2 February 2018 Maryant Fernandez Perez, European Digital Rights (EDRi) ICANN-Proposed Compliance Models Comments (pdf, 56 KB) ".... it appears that only model 3 is reconcilable with the GDPR, provided that the issues noted above are addressed. Both models 1 and 2 result in the potential publication of personal data on a scale that is neither necessary, nor proportionate ..."

See also 29 January 2018 Letter from Dimitris Avramopoulos, Věra Jourová & Sir Julian King [European Commission] to ICANN CEO Göran Marby re: European Commission Concerns Regarding GDPR and WHOIS.

Read the other comments here. My comment is here (pdf).

Related Links:

2) Other ICANN news
graphic "ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers"
a. Announcing Draft Plan For Continuing With The KSK Roll | ICANN.org: "The plan calls for rolling the root zone KSK on 11 October 2018 (one year later than originally planned)"--ICANN public comment period is open and closes 2 Apr 2018 23:59 UTC.

b. Information Transparency Initiative Update: The Content Audit and ICANN Taxonomy | ICANN.org: "ICANN is performing a first-ever quantitative and qualitative audit of all the content on www.icann.org. The audit began in November 2017 and will continue through to August 2018."

c. Global DNS and gTLDs--recommended reading for ICANN leadership and others--We have plundered the commons | weforum.org. See also: The Corruption of Capitalism: Why Rentiers thrive and work does not pay (London, Biteback, 2017).

3) Names, Domains & Trademarks
graphic "Names, Domains & Trademarks" ©2017 DomainMondo.com
a. Collapse in new gTLDs' domain name registrations continues into 2018--Editor's note: The below is NOT a picture of "Lack of Awareness" but "Registrant Rejection" of new gTLDs--
Top: Jan 2017 - Jan 2018;  Bottom: January 2018 (source: ntldstats.com)
After the collapse in new gTLDs' domain name registrations in 2017, some were hoping for a 'turnaround' starting in January 2018--no such luck--nobody wants these "losers" anymore--not even Chinese speculators (who have since moved on to crypto). Here are the details from the ntldstats.com data:
New gTLDs' domain name registrations as of 12/31/2017: 23,819,095
New gTLDs' domain name registrations as of 01/31/2018: 23,046,656
Net LOSS in January 2018 --------------------------------------- (772,439)
January Net Loss (772,439) X 12 (months) = Projected Net LOSS of (9,269,268) new gTLDs' domain name registrations for all of 2018 at January's rate, which would be equal to a net loss of 39% of all new gTLDs' domain name registrations existing on the last day of 2017.

Data at namestat.org shows only 19.8 million new gTLD domain name registrations as of Feb 1, 2018.

Editor's note: As I noted last month, it is now obvious to everyone (except 'deniers') that ICANN grossly mismanaged its ill-conceived and misbegotten expansion of gTLDs (from just 22 to over 1200). Among the multitude of mistakes, probably the most egregious were rejecting the advice of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (pdf) and U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division (pdf) with regard to competition, pricing power, and consumer (registrant) benefits and protections. The above referenced letter from the US DOJ Antitrust Division was attached to a letter to ICANN from NTIA in Dec 2008 (pdf).

b. ccTLD .au: 'Yourname.au' proposed as discussion opens on Australia's domain future | ZDNet.com

c. Q4 2017 Earnings season: Verisign | NASDAQ: VRSN Feb 8, 4:30pm ET. Versign is a registry services provider and operator, including gTLDs .COM and .NET, as well as internet security services provider, internet Root Zone Maintainer, and manager of  Root Servers A and J.

4) ICYMI Internet Domain News 
graphic "ICYMI Internet Domain News" ©2017 DomainMondo.com
  • "In Geneva, the UN working group did not reach agreement on recommendations for the UNGA [United Nations General Assembly] on the role of governments in international internet policy. NL and like-minded countries oppose UN control over the Internet and supported multi-stakeholder approach."--Arnold van Rhijn Jan 31, 2018
  • Internet Freedom Festival 2018 Schedule IFF 2018: March 5-9, 2018, Valencia, Spain.

5) Most Read Posts (# of pageviews Sun-Sat) this past week on DomainMondo.com: 
graphic "Domain Mondo" ©2017 DomainMondo.com
1. News Review | IANA Transition Unwind? ICANN Nightmare or Fantasy?
2. Amazon $AMZN, Apple $AAPL, Google $GOOGL, LIVE Webcasts Feb 1
3. Tech Review | Is Google Done? 'Can No Longer Innovate' Says Ex-Googler 
4. Facebook $FB Q4 2017 Earnings LIVE Webcast, Jan 31, 5pm ET 
5. Starbucks $SBUX CEO Kevin Johnson On Earnings & Future Of The Brand 

-- John Poole, Editor, Domain Mondo 

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2017-06-14

One World, One Internet? IGF 2017 Preparations: China Has Arrived!

IGF 2017 Second Open Consultations & MAG Meeting | Internet Governance Forum (IGF) | intgovforum.org: The second Open Consultations and Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) meeting in preparation for IGF 2017 (Geneva, Switzerland, 18-21 December), is meeting 12-14 June at the headquarters of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU.int), in Geneva, Switzerland. So far, one thing is clear: CHINA Has Arrived--selected tweets from @sgdickinson--

feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo


DISCLAIMER

2016-09-10

ICANN Answers Questions About The IANA Stewardship Transition

Timely and informative, ICANN has posted a Q&A about the IANA Stewardship Transition, full version at the ICANN.org link further below, excerpts follow after the following DomainMondo.com introductory note:

[Note--In answering Question 7 below, ICANN failed to pose and answer the real underlying Question: Under what circumstances, and how, could ICANN decide to relocate outside the United States and/or change its principal legal jurisdiction or place of incorporation in the future? In 2014, ICANN's then President and CEO Fadi Chehadé told a panel of the French Senate that the ICANN Board of Directors had given a "green light" to possibly creating a "parallel ICANN international structure, likely based in Geneva ..." See Will ICANN Board Disclose New Swiss Legal Structure at ICANN 50? | DomainMondo.com citing Will ICANN Be The Next International Organisation In Geneva? | ip-watch.org and the actual video (in French)--note Chehade's reference to "green light" @2:35 and what he says at that point (English translation here). See also: Why ICANN CEO Chehade quit early | IoN magazine: "... he [Chehade] told a panel in the French Senate that ICANN’s new European office could lead to moving ICANN’s headquarters outside the United States; only to say the exact opposite when in Washington DC just a few weeks later." 

Chehadé, who for unknown reasons resigned effective March 12, 2016, after serving only 3½ years as ICANN President & CEO (14 Sep 2012-12 Mar 2016), announced at ICANN's NCPH Intersessional session, January 29, 2013:
",,, welcome to LA, welcome to ICANN. This is the last time you'll come to the ICANN headquarters because soon we will no longer have one headquarters, we'll have three headquarters around the world ..."
--end of Note.]

Answering some of your questions on the stewardship transition  ICANN.org: "... Some questions remain about the nature of the IANA functions, ICANN, and the likely impacts of the transition and we [ICANN] wanted to answer them for you in one place.

1. Does the transition threaten Internet freedom?

No. The United States Government's contract with ICANN does not give the U.S. any power to regulate or protect speech on the Internet. The IANA functions are technical – not content – based ... 

2. Will countries be able to censor speech on the Internet after the transition?

No more so than they can today. Right now, there is nothing about ICANN or its contract with the U.S. Government that prevents a country from censoring or blocking content within its own borders. ICANN is a technical organization and does not have the remit or ability to regulate content on the Internet ... 

3. Will ICANN be more susceptible to capture by a single entity after the transition?


No. ICANN's multistakeholder model is designed to ensure that no single entity, whether country, business or interest group, can capture ICANN or exclude other parties from decision-making processes. Features of this model include open processes where anyone can participate, decisions made by consensus, established appeals mechanisms, and transparent and public meetings. These elements are all reinforced in the community transition proposal and have been building blocks for the free and open Internet we see today ... 

4. Will ICANN seek oversight by the U.N. to maintain its antitrust exemption after the transition?


No. ICANN is not, and never has been exempted from antitrust laws. ICANN has not been granted an antitrust exemption through any of its contracts with NTIA or the U.S. Department of Commerce. No court ruling in favor of ICANN has ever cited an antitrust exemption to support its ruling. This past July,NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling addressed the concerns about the possible antitrust liability of a post-transition ICANN and reaffirmed that "ICANN always has and will continue to be subject to antitrust laws." After the transition, ICANN will have no mandate, need or reason to seek to be overseen by another governmental or inter-governmental group for protection ... 

5. Will governments have more control over the Internet after the transition?

No. The transition proposal does not increase the role of governments over the Internet or ICANN as an organization. The multistakeholder model appropriately limits the influence of governments and intergovernmental organizations to an advisory role in policy development. More than 160 governments actively participate as a single committee and must come to a consensus before policy advice can be issued. After the transition, there will be times where the ICANN Board must give special consideration to the public policy advice of governments. However, this will only happen when there is no objection from any government in the committee – which includes the United States. This is a stricter requirement than is currently in place for government advice.


6. Does delaying the transition by one or two years have any negative consequences?


Yes, any delay of the transition could have significant global consequences. The Internet is a voluntary, trust-based system. A delay would introduce uncertainty, for businesses and other stakeholders, which could have long-term business, social, cultural, political and economic impacts. This past March, U.S. Ambassador David Gross testified that, "the clearest impact [of a delay] is on the broader, global community. It will signal that the U.S. has changed its position and no longer believes in a private-sector led internet and that governments will play a primary role in making the final decision. Russia, China, and others will welcome such a decision."...

7. Will ICANN relocate its headquarters outside of the United States after the transition?


No. ICANN will not relocate its corporate headquarters location after the transition. The transition proposal clearly states [PDF, 2.32 MB] that "the legal jurisdiction in which ICANN resides is to remain unchanged." California law is the basis for the new mechanisms created to empower the ICANN community and hold ICANN the organization, Board and community, accountable. In addition, ICANN's Articles of Incorporation are filed under California law, and its Bylaws state that ICANN's headquarters are in California.


8. Is it illegal to allow the transition to move forward without congressional approval because it is a transfer of U.S. property?

No. ICANN is not aware of any U.S. Government property that would be transferred as a result of the transition. In a letter to Chairman Grassley and Chairman Goodlatte [PDF, 1.25 MB] last month, NTIA stated that the Department of Commerce Office of General Counsel conducted a legal review of this issue and advised NTIA that transition would not result in the transfer of U.S. Government property, and that, in the view of the Department, the authoritative root zone file is not U.S. Government property.


9. Will the U.S. lose exclusive rights to the .mil and .gov top-level domains as a result of the transition?


The operation of and responsibility for .mil and .gov are not impacted by this transition. .mil and .gov cannot be reassigned without express approval from the U.S. Government. To formally reaffirm this,NTIA and ICANN exchanged a series of letters in June 2016, which establish the U.S. Government as the administrative authority over the .mil, .gov, .us, and .edu top-level domains. This means that any changes made to these top-level domains can only be made with the express written approval of the U.S. Government.

10. Will Verisign have the ability to raise prices of .com domain names on 1 October 2016 as a result of the transition?

No. The cost of .com domains is capped at $7.85 until 30 November 2018. The current pricing of the .com registry is defined by two separate contracts (1) the .com Registry Agreement between Verisign and ICANN; and (2) the Cooperative Agreement between Verisign and the Department of Commerce. After 2018, Verisign and NTIA will have to negotiate to change the terms for the Cooperative Agreement or agree to end the Cooperative Agreement before discussing new pricing of the .com domain with ICANN. In letters [PDF, 851 KB] to Chairman Cruz, Chairman Lee, and Chairman Duffy last week, the Assistant Attorney General stated that, consistent with past practices, it is expected that NTIA will seek the advice of the U.S. Department of Justice on any competition issues implicated by the extension of these two contracts.

11. Do the recent independent review process (IRP) decisions regarding applications for new generic top level domains prove that ICANN is not sufficiently transparent or accountable enough for the transition?

No. An IRP is an accountability mechanism used to review and resolve a concern raised by the community over a policy decision made by ICANN. Any result from an IRP, whether positive or negative, demonstrates that the system of checks and balances built into the ICANN multistakeholder model works. The IRP has been enhanced to strengthen ICANN's commitment to employ open, transparent, bottom-up, multistakeholder processes after the transition.

12. Does ICANN have an operational relationship with the Chinese government?

No. ICANN does not have any operational relationship with the Chinese Government. ICANN's engagement center in China is one of seven around the world. The presence of an ICANN engagement center or operational hub within a country does not imply any level of support for the nation's government or its policies.

See also on Domain Mondo:

Domain Mondo archive