PDA

View Full Version : Bill challenges ICANN, VeriSign


Chicken
06-20-03, 12:17 PM
Bill challenges ICANN, VeriSign


By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
June 19, 2003, 7:06 PM PT


Two congressmen introduced a bill Thursday that would block an Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers plan to give control of all expiring domains ending in .com and .net to VeriSign.
The bill also calls for a federal investigation of ICANN's business practices.

A pair of Washington state politicians, on behalf of a collection of companies that register domain names, said they intend to block a controversial procedure that would establish VeriSign as a central place to buy all expiring .com and .net domains. The legislation also considers transforming ICANN into a federal advisory committee, effectively ending its quasi-independent status as a separate organization that has a contract with the U.S. government.

Last year, ICANN approved a plan that would, in effect, give a sizable boost to VeriSign's bottom line by shifting revenue that is currently shared by the scores of accredited registrars. The registrars bitterly opposed the idea--called the Wait-Listing Service--but were rebuffed by the ICANN board.

In response, some irked registrars created the Domain Justice Coalition and turned to Congress for help. The bill, sponsored by Reps. Brian Baird and Jay Inslee, both Washington state Democrats, would place ICANN's decision on hold and order the U.S. General Accounting Office to investigate ICANN's business practices.

More...

http://news.com.com/2100-1028-1019438.html
Something odd and wrong with ICANN? Someone noticed this? Changes need to be made?

About time.

I also like this one...
One of ICANN's own board members sued the group for access to its records, which led to a state judge last year ordering ICANN to open its books.

<snip>

"We welcome any kind of interest in ICANN because we are a transparent and accountable organization," ICANN spokeswoman Mary Hewitt said. "Whether it's the U.S. government or Belgium that wants to look at us, we welcome the interest. We post everything on our Web site."
Not the reconds apparently. Now they might (??) but if so, it took one of the board members suing ICANN to do it. I didn't go looking to see if records are now posted.

But about this part...
The legislation also considers transforming ICANN into a federal advisory committee, effectively ending its quasi-independent status as a separate organization that has a contract with the U.S. government.
First, I can see a 'federal advisory committee' being just as, if not more, ucked fup. Are the same people going to be there? What is going to be different? Probably nothing.

Second, a 'federal advisory committee' means U.S. Federal? I can see that not flying and being popular with many groups.

interactive
06-20-03, 04:30 PM
That federal advisory thing would never fly. ICANN probably has problems but not as many as the "federal advisory committee" would have. Just the feds trying to get their dirty hands into everything.

no1v2
06-20-03, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by interactive:

That federal advisory thing would never fly. ICANN probably has problems but not as many as the "federal advisory committee" would have. Just the feds trying to get their dirty hands into everything.
Not at all, this legislation is very much needed and an investigation into ICANN is called for. ICANN's reputation didn't come from nowhere :(

Chicken
06-20-03, 08:34 PM
From the other thread and article, it says:
But the wishes of the ICANN Registrar’s Constituency was thrown out the window when the ICANN board (including a SnapName board member) caused the board vote in favor of the WLS...
Is that saying that an ICANN boardmember is a SnapNames boardmember?! If so, then I can see just one of the very many problems with ICANN. Not just usual problems, "federal investigation of ICANN's business practices' problems.