[ncdnhc-discuss] A statement on the ICANN "reform" proposal

[Milton Mueller]

Lynn's proposal is an admission that ICANN as it exists is a failure. 
But we disagree entirely on what has failed and why.

Lynn's his notion of "reform" is to jettison all those aspects of ICANN 
that were innovative and unique to the Internet community: the private 
sector basis, the at-large membership as a proxy for the global Internet
community, the grounding in bottom-up consensus development, etc. 
That is a real tragedy, for the rhetorical and occasional substantive 
commitment to self-governance, however much it was honored in the 
breach, was the only saving grace of ICANN.

I have been predicting since 1999 that ICANN would be pressured to 
assume the form of an intergovernmental organization. This is not 
something I wanted to see happen, it was just something I expected to 
happen. The only thing surprising here is that it is ICANN's management 
itself that is brazenly selling out to governments; I rather expected ICANN 
would be pressured by governments to accommodate a larger role for 
states. I even fantasized that the people who controlled ICANN would 
resist it somewhat.

But I underestimated the narrow organizational imperatives that seem to 
drive ICANN management. This reform plan seems to be motivated solely 
by a desire to avoid the hard work of achieving legitimacy and to 
quadruple its budget. The keystone of the plan is a Faustian bargain with 
national governments. Instead of EARNING the support of ccTLDs, 
Internet users, and other stakeholders they want to coast on taxation 
and the second-hand political legitimacy of national governments. I don't 
think that will be accepted by the global Internet community. And (while I 
could be wrong) there is no indication of support for this move from the 
US government. It may be that ICANN is (once again) thumbing its nose 
at the USA and hoping that deals with the European Commission and a 
few westernized Asian states will bring it greater independence from the 
US. If that is part of the game, it is a very dangerous game indeed.

There is a basic contradiction here: if Internet governance is going to take 
place via an intergovernmental regime, why start with the existing ICANN? 
Why not start from scratch? Lynn and the small Jones Day clique may in 
the end be hoist by their own petard.

--MM