Call Me a Unilateralist, But a Private ICANN Makes Me Uneasy

From BBC:

Internet control ‘nears autonomy’
Friday, 29 September 2006, 16:20 GMT 17:20 UK

The US government says it will maintain oversight of the internet but with far less hands-on involvement.

Icann, the body which oversees the future of the net on behalf of the US, has been given more independence in a new agreement for the next three years.

Dr Paul Twomey, CEO of Icann, said the deal was “a major step forward for Icann autonomy”.

The US government has pledged to cede control of the net to private sector hands at an unspecified future point.

Given the noise made last year about the UN, EU, or some other body exerting control over the Internet, the idea that a private entity might take it over and start acting like Internet Wall of Shame members like Google, Yahoo!, or Cisco in acceding to the will of tyrants and control freaks is very unsettling.

I would prefer that US oversight over ICANN be a permanent thing. If the rest of the world doesn’t like it, they can always build their own Internet.

_____________________________________

UPDATE: The New York Sun editorializes –

Yet for all of its shortcomings, Icann is a precious treasure compared with the next most likely outcome: the emergence of a U.N. agency to govern the Internet.Curiously, the same day the memorandum of understanding was signed with the Commerce Department, Icann issued a press release emphasizing that Icann could be more independent with fewer reporting requirements to the American government. The press release appears intended not for American review but for international consumption. For years, international resentment builds as the Internet has any vestigial connection to the American government, which merely designed and developed the Internet at great expense and then magnanimously gave it to the world gratis.

The very pretext for U.N. interest in the Internet governance and its initiation of the IGF is dissatisfaction with current Internet governance, or lack thereof, under Icann. KofiAnnan has established an advisory group for the IGF and has taken a visible role in the IGF. The IGF has 12 mandates, most of which are thinly veiled foundations for a U.N.role in Internet governance. One example is: “Strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in existing and/or future Internet governance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries.” The approximate translation of this phrasing into standard English would mean the establishment of a new international Internet governance body.

America and every country around the world have much at risk if the Internet weregoverned by an incompetent or a politically motivated organization. While many in America would prefer that our government had retained more control over the Internet, many more individuals around the world would prefer to sever all remnants of a relationship between the Internet and America. Icann is far from a perfect administrator of the Internet, but it is far better than the alternative being conceived at the United Nations.