[ncdnhc-discuss] governments and ICANN

[James Love]

The Lynn proposal to put governments directly on the ICANN board would be a
huge change for ICANN, and deserve some discussion.   Much of this is
related to the older discussion of mission creep for ICANN, and how one can
ensure that whoever controls ICANN will not be able to use that power for a
host of inappropriate measures.

My comment last week regarding the benefits of the US 1st amendment, when
comparing a US only relationship with ICANN to a multilateral government
control over ICANN, was offered to begin a discussion.  Non-US citizens are
correct to suggest both that the US government is guilty of a myriad of sins
including for example overreaching IP laws that are controversial
everywhere, as well as a number of speech controls that seem to survive our
own 1st amendment, and I welcome any debate or discussion of which
alternatives would be improvements (feasible or not in terms of getting
control over ICANN), as well discussions over which legally binding
mechanism could limit ICANN's mission whoever runs it, including for example
a group of self appointed or corporate controlled un-elected board members.

In this spirit I suggest that the risks of multilateral government control
over ICANN are not trivial, and go far beyond the problems of selling Nazi
artifacts to the French, a practice I would be happy to see suppressed if
this was the only consequence of such a precedent.   And while one can argue
about the French/Yahoo dispute, I would like to hear someone defend the
Chinese Internet controls as a legitimate form of cultural diversity, to
mention only one important example.   I personally don't think one is a
bigot, ignorant or arrogant to point out the risks multilateral government
controls on ICANN (compared to, for example, US government control over the
root, which has existed for many years).   And of course, one hopes even
more than it is possible to find a way to keep ICANN independent from direct
government controls, while preventing ICANN mission creep.   I think the
entire topic would benefit from more discussion.

  Jamie

PS: Also, given all of the post 9/11 talk in ICANN, there must be a "spook"
angle to the various government options, much of which I don't fully
appreciate.

--------------------
James Love, mailto:love at cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org
voice +1.202.387.8030, mobile +1.202.361.3040, fax +1.202.234.5176