[ncdnhc-discuss] Internet is global=we need central planning

[Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law]

Personally, I think a merely regional approach is unimaginative.  I'd like
to see some of the thinking that underlies the DNSO applied to the issue
of decentralization.  So, yes, I'd like national/regional devolution, but
in parallel to functional devolution.

So, let's have a commercial sector -- auction off a few TLDs.

A non-commercial sector (have a lottery among NGOs accredited to the UN
and/or some other well-recognized bodies)

Let's give a number of TLD naming/running rights to international treaty
bodies

And so on...

I want *real* *great* variety here....

P.S. Don't feed the trolls.

On Fri, 3 May 2002, James Love wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Crocker" <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>
> To: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
> Cc: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin at law.miami.edu>;
> "NCDNHC-discuss list" <discuss at icann-ncc.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] Internet is global=we need central planning
> 
> 
> > At 03:13 PM 5/3/2002 -0400, James Love wrote:
> > >    I have a lot of respect for people who can figure out the details,
> >
> > James, then please explain why you so forcefully reject responses from
> such
> > folk when you do not like the response.
> 
>     Which such folk?  You appear completely unable to figure out how to
> undertake any centralization of ICANN's decision making.  If you could make
> some constructive suggestions in this regard, I would be impressed.
> 
> > Instead you ignore the request and pretend that the details are not
> > important to the adoption of a major change to DNS administration.
> >
> >
> > >from first come first service to UDRP type
> > >ADRs, to systems that blocked dictionary names but not none dictionary
> > >names,
> >
> > That you would suggest that this is a viable alternatives shows just how
> > simplistic a model you are working with.  It utterly ignores real-world
> > implications that make such an alternative useful only as an academic
> exercise.
> 
>     Wow, thanks for the critique.  THAT was useful.
> 
> > >My preferred system is to have DNSO 1, the current one, and have new
> DNSO's
> > >self organize for regions (such as for example Europe, one possibly for
> > >spanish speaking countries, one for Africa, one for the Indian
> subcontient,
> > >etc),
> >
> > What is the advantage of "regional" DNSO's?  What is there in the history
> > of the current DNSO that provides any basis for believing that it and its
> > clones could work successfully.
> 
>      There are several adavantages of a regional DNSO approach.
> 
> 1.    The first one is to avoid the typical problems of monopoly, of
> monoculture, of single point of failure, of too little innovation.  If there
> are more than one body doing something, you learn from the diversity.  Some
> will make one kind of mistake, others will make other mistakes, and everyone
> will learn from those mistakes, but also from the various successes.
> 
> 2.    The second is that as regional DNSOs become somewhat powerful, they
> become a countervailing force to the global ICANN.  This is what is saving
> the ASO.  It has real regional policy making bodies that are not about to be
> bullied by ICANN.
> 
> 3.  The third is that multiple DNSOs change the incentive structure.  A
> single DNSO can rationalize slothful or anticompetitive behavior, because
> the incumbents typically benefit from this.  This is ICANN today, taking
> care of the Verisign, the ccTLDs, etc., preventing non-profits or industry
> trade associations from running their own TLDs.... But with several regional
> DNSO, if you sit on your hands, your locals cannot innovate while the rest
> of the world can.  The regional DNSO has an incentive to move ahead, or
> watch others move.
> 
> 4.  The fourth is that consumers/users can pick the regional regulatory
> approach they like best.  There will be different combinations of protecting
> consumer interests, insuring reliablity, etc.   Users can vote with their
> registrations.  If Euorpe or Asia get it right, I'll register my domains
> there.
> 
> Jamie
> 
> --------------------------------
> James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org
> http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
> 
> 
> 

-- 
[Note: I killfile Cr*cker, JW*lliams, other noisemakers]

		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin at law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                       -->It's cool here.<--