[alac] ICM Registry statement on Senators' bill
http://www.icmregistry.com/ICMCyberSafety.html ICM Registry comments on the proposed "Cyber Safety for Kids Act of 2006" While we are gratified that the Senators seem to understand the value of ICM Registry's proposal, we are concerned that the legislation ignores the fact that ICANN was established as a privately controlled, international organization and not as the arm of any government. Contrary to the assertion in the proposed legislation, the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Department of Commerce (DOC) and ICANN contemplates that the DOC and ICANN will collaborate on developing policies and procedures for creating new TLDs. The MOU does not give the DOC authority to select the top level domains that would be added to the root system. That approach is unworkable given the Internet's global reach and is antithetical to the concept of private sector management on which ICANN rests. Anyone who followed the recently concluded World Summit on the Information Society understands that unilateral US action in the absence of any threat to the security or stability of the root is unacceptable to the global Internet community. Furthermore, a mandatory domain of any sort is fundamentally incompatible with the open and voluntary nature of the Internet. Only a voluntary system that provides incentives for websites to use the domain can hope to be effective. Any mandatory adult domain would instantly face constitutional problems. For example, for the past eight years the United States has tried to defend the Child Online Protection Act from a First Amendment challenge, and the Supreme Court in 2004 upheld an injunction barring its enforcement. That law has never gone into effect, and it appears doubtful it ever will. Any legislation to impose a labeling or ratings system on Internet content providers would face insurmountable First Amendment problems, as well. ICM Registry has committed to oppose any such mandatory proposal and has also provided a White Paper explaining in detail why this is true. The Congressional Research Service recently analyzed this issue and stated in a report that any such mandatory plan would raise constitutional doubts. ICANN has followed a thorough and rigorous process for evaluating new TLDs, including the ICM Registry proposal - a process that has taken more than 2 years. A voluntary TLD can provide the benefits sought by this Bill and can be operational within months. Under a mandatory approach, however, those benefits face years of legal challenges and may never see the light of day. |