As lawyer to a number of ccTLD registrars/managers, I
was bemused to see the request for comments about the "ccTLD Delegation and Administration
Policies".Are ICANN really serious? They post the document on 5 July 2000 and
want CONSIDERED comments by 13 July 2000????? (Have you realized how many pages of
documents are relevant for consideration??? I stopped counting at the 20th referred-to
topic!)
Given that there is very real doubt that ICANN have ANY jurisdiction in
relation to delegation and administration of ccTLDs (we have QC’s opinion that they
probably don’t) this is entirely unacceptable and in my opinion whoever decided on
this deadline is acting unconscionably.
Indeed a number of ccTLDs managers whom
I represent are sufficiently concerned about the attempts by ICANN to extend jurisdiction
that they are in discussions with local governments for the ccTLDs. Especially
given the EU's recent comments that ICANN is still "very close operationally" to
the US Department of State and not properly independent these parties are very concerned.
These governments have consulted me with the ccTLD managers about the possibility
of local primary legislation (or other effective local regulations) to formally prevent
ICANN having any authority except with respect to simple root-server administration
co-ordination.
Personally given their ridiculously tight deadlines for responses
on this and issues such as the new domains, I am of the opinion that the sooner they
are formally reined in the better. (IMHO this is becoming an ICANN standard for any
paper that might be contentious).
I have spoken to some of the ccTLD managers today
and (given the need in some cases for translations to be obtained) they are all of
the opinion that this demonstrates that ICANN is not really interested in considered
opinions but rather seeks to rail-road yet another contentious change through because
it suits ICANN’s interests to do so. They are also of the opinion that ICANN
can hardly claim to be representative of the internet community if they behave in
such a reprehensible manner.
The ccTLDs I represent will all be making responses
but they will not be done within 7 days because such a considered response is commercially
impossible in that time. As one registrar said to me "ICANN may have large
banks of lawyers and administrators able to react so fact which is why they are so
costly! We can't because we're running a commercial operation – and our lawyers
are so busy that they can’t drop everything to respond to such tight deadlines.
It's no wonder ICANN want to charge a domain name tax to cover their costs, if they
kept to the role they were originally claiming (namely gTLD administration and root
server co-ordingation ) instead of persistently trying to expand it, they wouldn't
be a bottomless pit for money" (his [translated] sentiments condensed and expletives
removed).
Considered Response to follow in proper course.
(Responses will no
doubt be posted on various other web-sites if ICANN have no follow-up process)
NETLAW@NETLAW.CO.UK
Lawyer
to various ccTLDs