Internet Group Skewered By Lawmakers
A chorus of House Energy and Commerce Communications Subcommittee members today called for an extension of the U.S. government's formal oversight agreement with the nonprofit that administers the Internet domain name system, citing concerns about the 11-year-old organization's transparency, accountability, budget processes, and stakeholder affairs. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers remains "far from a model of effective and sustainable self-governance" and it would be unwise to shrink the federal government's role amid increased cyber attacks and rapid Internet innovation, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., said at a hearing. Subcommittee ranking member Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., Mike Doyle, D-Pa., John Shimkus, R-Ill., and Lee Terry, R-Neb., each backed the extension of a joint project agreement between ICANN and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
"ICANN seems better at furthering its own interests than those of the millions of Internet users it's supposed to look out for," Doyle said. Terry and others emphasized the issue is a matter of national security and must be examined carefully." Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., said ICANN does not have the independent, authoritative governance structure to keep other governments from abusing their power to interfere with Internet governance and citizens' use of the platform. Subcommittee Chairman Rick Boucher, D-Va., is reportedly drafting a letter to NTIA with the backing of Stearns and Energy and Commerce ranking member Joe Barton that recommends a one-year extension of the agreement. Boucher told Tech Daily Dose after the hearing that he had not made a firm decision on how to proceed but would be doing so in the near future.
ICANN President Paul Twomey insisted his group has improved its operation and has "passed the test" proposed in its original 1998 arrangement with NTIA that a multi-stakeholder, private sector led could perform a narrow technical function. He also pointed out that a separate NTIA-ICANN deal pertaining to the global coordination of the domain name system's backbone and IP address allocation, which is the "key instrument of oversight," will not sunset. Twomey also warned that any temporary extension of the JPA will send a signal internationally that the U.S. government does not have faith in ICANN's industry driven model. For years, some foreign governments and stakeholders have called for alternatives to the existing governance structure like oversight by the United Nations or other international bodies.
Christine Jones, general counsel for Web hosting company GoDaddy, said ICANN has made great progress toward achieving the goals laid out as part of its formation but has "not yet achieved the competition or bottom-up representation called for" in its bylaws. Her company believes the JPA must not only be extended but also revised to include openness and transparency as overall guiding principles, she said. NTIA Associate Administrator Fiona Alexander told the subcommittee that regardless of whether the JPA is terminated, modified, or extended, her agency will be active as part of ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee and by filing comments in various public consultations.
Twomey also pledged not to move forward on ICANN's introduction of new top-level domains, such as .biz, .info, and .us, until fraud-related fears by brand owners are addressed. ICANN plans to begin accepting applications for new domains in early 2010, which could bring in an initial $90 million for ICANN plus steep renewal fees. As a result, businesses and consumers will face higher Internet-related costs, Verizon Associate General Counsel Sarah Deutsch said. "ICANN has acknowledged concerns but has not adequately addressed them," she said, suggesting the group commission an impartial study of the domain name marketplace to gauge whether there is a need for hundreds of new domains and whether proposed changes would guard against cyber-squatting, fraud, and confusion.
Join the Discussion
The National Journal Group has the right (but not the obligation) to monitor the comments and to remove any materials it deems inappropriate.
Comments powered by Disqus