This week, The Register ran a story on how the US supposedly had given up its 'control' over ICANN. ICANN, the body which assigns IP addresses and domain names worldwide, currently falls under the US Commerce Department via a contractual agreement; this means the US government can control ICANN. El Reg claimed the US had given up this control; Ars was quick to respond, stating that "the existing arrangement was likely to continue, at least for another year." Since the US had stated that it wanted to fully privatise ICANN by 2000, we'll have to wait and see what ICANN looks like in a year. In the meantime, do we really want the US to open up ICANN?
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
So, lets have you solution to this, instead of a "as long as its not the US government" statement. Who should control ICANN? What regulations should the controlling body ahere to? Which nation's laws should the controlling body fall under?
ICANN should be privatised, as the US had promised to do by 2000. There is no need for the UN or the pope to control ICANN. All that should be done is the completion of the privatisation, removing the undemocratic influence the US currently has over ICANN. I really do not understand why you keep yapping on about the UN and China.
Member since:2005-11-14
Thanks for your reply. I just do not think it's a good idea to have a couple of private citizens having total control over the domain names considering that so much of the world's economy relies on the Internet.
Again, thanks for your time and for clarifying your view for me.
Member since:
2005-11-14
Nowhere is it said in my column that I want the UN to control ICANN.
I realize that. You didn't say who you thought should have control, or offer any real solution to this. Instead, you just echoed the popular opinion of those outside of the States. You just don't want the US government to have any say so.
So, lets have you solution to this, instead of a "as long as its not the US government" statement. Who should control ICANN? What regulations should the controlling body ahere to? Which nation's laws should the controlling body fall under?
All the rest of your post is irrelevant to my column.
The rest of my post was looking at the "larger picture" of the real story going on here. It was very much relevant.