The Internet set free
ICANN has recently signed an historic Affirmation Agreement with the U.S. Department of Commerce which ICANN says confirms the effectiveness of its model of international multi-stakeholder and bottom-up governance of the global Internet addressing system.
“This means that there can no longer be any doubt that the Internet belongs to the world and is not under the control of any single government or special interest group,” said Mike Silber, a member of ICANN’s Board of Directors. “The very fact that I, as a citizen of South Africa serve on ICANN’s board, along with representatives from around the world speaks to the international diversity of this very unique organization.”
We caught up with Silber to learn more about this agreement and find out why it is such a significant development in the Internet environment.
MyBroadband: Can you please tell us a bit more detail about what the previous ICANN system looked like and what control they had?
Mike Silber: The history of Internet unique identifiers (domain names, but also IP addresses, AS numbers and protocol port and parameter numbers) must be seen in the context of the Internet as the creation of a US Department of Defence sponsored research project as Arpanet was created by the US Department of Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa). The first connection was established 40 years and 1 month ago on 2 September 1969 between The University of California Los Angeles and The Stanford Research Institute.
As the Arpanet expanded, naming and numbering responsibility remained with the scientists, researchers and academics under the auspices of Darpa and finally centred on the late Jon Postel.
The increased popularity of the commercial Internet in the late 1990s saw the US Government moving control of Internet unique identifiers to a private sector led institution, ICANN. However ICANN’s role was closely controlled in terms of a Memorandum of Understanding with the US Government. This was a compromise between the international organisation proposed by Postel and others and the reluctance of the US to relinquish control to a brand new organisation.
The US Government proposal that saw the creation of ICANN, posited a “loosening of the apron strings” over time. However the change in US administration shortly after ICANN’s formation saw pressure for greater US control, contrasting with greater international Internet usage and a push for greater global oversight and accountability.
It also saw an increased tension between those advocating for government control of the Internet and those who saw the private sector as having transformed the closed Arpanet into the global Internet phenomenon and wanted control to remain in the hands of the private sector communities who had led this massive expansion.
The Memorandum of Agreement morphed into a Joint Project Agreement (JPA), with little real change. ICANN remained responsible to the US Government, reporting to the NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration) and with significant limitations on the form and function of ICANN. Moreover the JPA was an exclusive agreement, which could not be replicated with other countries, governments or institutions without placing ICANN in a political impasse from which it could not move.
Accordingly – no similar agreements with other countries were signed or even posited.
MyBroadband: What does the recently signed Affirmation Agreement with the U.S. Department of Commerce change?
Mike Silber: By allowing the JPA to lapse, the US Government has sent a positive message to the rest of the world – it is setting ICANN free. However, with freedom comes responsibility and the Affirmation signed between ICANN and the US Government essentially recognises that freedom as well as the associated responsibilities.
ICANN no longer reports to the US Government individually, but rather affirms its responsibility to listen to US Government input through the existing ICANN Government Advisory Committee, in which the USA is one of dozens of countries with representation. The US Government thus becomes one voice amongst equals.
In addition, ICANN has committed to a series of public reviews in which the US Government may participate. The purpose of these reviews is to ensure that ICANN remains true to its mission, operationally efficient and accountable to the global community.
The other significant change is that committing to consider one government’s views as expressed through a multi-state committee and a series of reviews, is no longer exclusive or exclusionary. There is no longer any danger of stalemate in making similar commitments to other countries.
MyBroadband: What future steps are in the pipeline to give other countries more control?
Mike Silber: As you can see from the positive comments to the Affirmation from some significant international institutions that the outreach has already started. For example, Viviane Reding, EU Commissioner for Information Society and Media has stated:
“Internet users worldwide can now anticipate that ICANN’s decisions on domain names and addresses will be more independent and more accountable, taking into account everyone’s interests… If effectively and transparently implemented, this reform can find broad acceptance among civil society, businesses and governments alike”.
ICANN has existing structures to allow governments, civil society and business to participate and influence its decisions. My appointment to the Board by the country code Names Supporting Organisation is an example of this. This does not necessarily mean that governments or countries will have more control! It means that the views of countries and governments become equalised and take their place alongside the views of users, business, civil society and the Internet community as a whole as input to the way ICANN manages global unique identifiers.
ICANN would be most willing to consider similar affirmations with other countries, containing a statement of the role and responsibility of ICANN and its accountability to the global community. Such affirmations would not allow the primacy of one country over another, or grouping over another – but rather as a multi-stakeholder, bottom-up directed organisation ICANN will recognise all views and try accommodate them, in much the same way as the Internet does.
MyBroadband: How will South Africa benefit from the changes at ICANN?
Mike Silber: Firstly, South Africa can take comfort that it can take its rightful place in discussion of policy and accountability, with regard to its views being subject to a veto or some higher power.
As I indicated, as the first South African to serve on the ICANN Board, I am able to represent the views of our country and continent as well as our developing society’s needs within the Board. The major change is that now these views and needs share equal status with those of the developed world and developed economies.
ICANN Agreement and Internet ownership – discussion
Loading ...