Re: [wg-c] Eureka?

[Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>]

Pardon the late reply, I've been away.

Ross Wm. Rader wrote:

> In my mind, there is a clear separation between ownership of the TLD,
> operation of the TLD and useage of the SLD.TLD pairs. What do you propose
> in this regard? Do registries own the TLD property? What sort of terms do
> you envision for the operational grants? (ie. long term, short term, in
> perpetuity...) Are the operational grants assignable?
>
> I do not have any major problems with the scenario that you suggest, but
> some finer brush strokes are definitely in order...

Good questions. You're absolutely right--more detail aboutthe specifics of the
rights need to be fleshed out. I do not
pretend to have ready, airtight answers to all of these questions,
by the way. Like you I am working my way through them in
interaction with the list.

I do have a "philosophy," however. And
most of the differences about how one paints the finer brush strokes,
as you felicitiously put it, depend upon how one conceives of
ICANN's role; i.e. on one's "philosophy."

I want ICANN to be nothing more than a coordinator of an
Inter-networking process that is driven by private, voluntary initiative.
I do not want ICANN to be the 'Net equivalent of a broadcast licensing
authority, a consumer protection agency, and a trademark registration
authority all bundled into one. All of these functions are currently
performed--much better--by national agencies, all of whom are
capable of cooperating internationally when necessary.

How to best implement that limited role for ICANN?

First, registries cannot "own" the right to be included in anyone's
root space. My paradigm is in accord with Rutkowski's:
the Internet is a group of cooperating private networks interested
in sharing resources.

Second, I can't see the reason for a single, rigid policy on the
relationship between ownership of the TLD and the
operation of the TLD. That's a business model question, and
ICANN should not impose or even favor business models.
It should simply facilitate cooperation and coordination
among the entities that choose various models.

Third, definitely visibility in the ICANN root should be contingent
upon certain criteria and subject to recall in the case of abuses.
The abuses should be limited to ones that threaten the stability
of the Internet or disrupt the cooperation process that ensures
connectivity. Let other agencies take care of content regulation,
competition policy, consumer fraud, and so on. ICANN, to repeat,
(but some people really need the repetition) cannot try to use
its leverage over the root to become  the
Regulator of Everything That Happens on the Internet. But it
must zealously safeguard the technical coordination process
that makes domain name resolution work.

In general, I see no reason why registries should not be able to
transfer or assign the right to administer a TLD, subject of course
to national and international antitrust limitations.

Finally, of course registration of a particular SLD.TLD
is a grant or lease of property rights, a transfer from the
zone administrator to the registrant.

--
m i l t o n   m u e l l e r // m u e l l e r @ s y r . e d u
syracuse university          http://istweb.syr.edu/~mueller/