What Have We Learned: Greater IP Enforcement Doesn't Work... Yet That's What Governments Want To Give

ICANN Says US Gov't Should Let It Go Private, While US Wants More Control

from the this-won't-end-well dept

Mon, Mar 28th 2011 12:30pm — Mike Masnick

We were just talking about how the US government -- despite existing concerns from pretty much the rest of the world that it already has too much control over ICANN -- wants more control over the organization that manages the basic structure of the internet. It appears that ICANN is looking to go in the other direction. ICANN boss Rod Beckstrom has sent a letter to the US government asking to be set free. In the letter, Beckstrom notes that the original plan had always been to privatize ICANN, and that was supposed to happen 11 years ago. Beckstrom points out that same thing we noted, which is that foreign governments are concerned about US control over the internet, and they're not going to look kindly on closer ties with the government. I have to admit that I'm intrigued what Beckstrom could do with an ICANN not under US government control. After all, he's literally written an entire book on the power of distributed systems over centralized ones. It would be great if he really worked to turn ICANN into a distributed system that couldn't be censored by any particular government agency.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: control, government, icann

20 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:37pm

Exactly
After all, he's literally written an entire book on the power of distributed systems over centralized ones.

And therein lies the rub.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:40pm

Re: Exactly
Yeah who would have thunk to make the internet a distributed system .......

/sarc, heavy heavy sarc
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:43pm

Based on the decisions made at the last meeting (including approving .xxx domains) it is very unlikely that ICANN will ever be made private. At this point, they have proven not to be very good caretakers of things, specifically ignoring the advice of their appointed advisors, and against the will of many governments, including the US.

http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/54755-icann-approves-xxx-domain
[ link to this | view in thread ]
misterdoug (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:00pm

Let me guess...
The U.S. government has to control ICANN, because otherwise TLDs could be used by terrorists and Satan to promote socialism, gay marriage and copyright infringement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:04pm

Re:
Anyone know where I can buy one of those .xxx domains? Are they just not for sale yet?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:06pm

Re: Re: Exactly
Well, we know who would have thunk to make it less so.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:09pm

Re: Re:
They are not for sale yet, it was only approved last week. I suspect it will take 6 months or so to turn it up. That is of course if anyone decides to actually DNS them, which is doubtful.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:09pm

Yes, I'm worried too, green snowflake. The internet is pure and free of smut and these nasty .xxx domains will poison it!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:16pm

Re:
Actually, it isn't a question of poisoning the internet. Rather, it is the opposite. Limiting free speech by forcing people to put porn only on these domains, and they allowing individual ISPs to deny their users access. Already Australia and India have indicated that they will block these domains, and it is very likely that many other countries will follow suit.

Can you imagine Comcast deciding not to offer DNS for these domains? Perhaps even blocking requests for them directly? After all, they are for adults only.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:16pm

Re: Re: Re:
Don't waste your money. The .XXX deal was constructed entirely to benefit the registrar, at the expense of the entire rest of the Internet.

The entire rest of the Internet has responded to this by beginning the process of blacklist and BOGUS'ing the entire TLD. Your .xxx domain will be absolutely worthless even before the zone goes live.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:30pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Actually, protesting the .xxx domain is part of why I want one. I don't want to put adult content on it, I just want a regular domain that just happens to end in .xxx. It would be a clear sign that it's just for the money, not for any child concerns at all.

It's also to protest the idiots blocking an entire TLD. That's just not a smart thing to do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:34pm

Re: Re:
You don't get it. Porn will not be limited to .xxx, it's just an extra TLD that they can use (eg: playboy.com will also have playboy.xxx and it will probably just point to playboy.com). .xxx is also not limited to porn as well, it can be used in other ways.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 3:32pm

yes, boo hoo, how dare the US try to control what they had created
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 5:33pm

Changing from a procurement contract with the USG to a cooperative agreement (which is, of course, a contract with the USG)is not exactly a relenquishment of control.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bram Cohen, 28 Mar 2011 @ 8:18pm

"I have to admit that I'm intrigued what Beckstrom could do with an ICANN not under US government control."

Make himself filthy stinking rich?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Any Mouse (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 9:51pm

Re:
What, exactly, did the US create, here? Be verrrrry specific.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
G Thompson (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:57pm

Re:
The US created the Internet?

Wow!!!

I mean just... WoW..

the patriotic fervour you must feel every time you salute the flag must be exhilarating...

I gather you prescribe to the Parochial mandate that the US invented the Universe!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 12:57am

Re:
In what magical christmas land do you live in? This is the US Government. Of course it's all about control.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2011 @ 3:00am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's also to protest the idiots blocking an entire TLD. That's just not a smart thing to do.

It's been a BCP for many years; clearly, you're in need of remedial education.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
orbitalinsertion (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 5:30pm

Private? How?
Will this be like the other sweet privatization deals that the likes of Verisign and Network Solutions got? Fsck that noise.

But if there is a good way to go about this, I'm all for it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]