Re: [alac] US DOC on Internet governance

["Roberto Gaetano" <alac_liaison@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just two comments.

First, the statement of the US government did not say anything different 
from what had been said in other occasions. It seems to me the same refrain 
since the White Paper: we (USG) believe in self-regulation of the privwate 
sector, and would end direct governmental intervention in Internet matters, 
however we would exerce adult supervision until we see fit. Of course, 
different people at different moments have speculated in different ways 
about if and when USG would see fit to pass the "power".

Second, USG does indeed care, and very very much! Otherwise, .cu would have 
been out of the root since long, as .iq, .ly, and many others, at least for 
some period of time. As a matter of fact, USG keeps a void position of power 
in principle: the very moment in which USG will exerce its power beyond what 
would be acceptable on an international level, i.e. for instance applying 
strictly its own laws and embargo on Cuba, the result would be an almost 
immediate split of the root. And this will have ripercussions for the US 
economy that are not completely foreseeable, but probably not in the 
positive direction. In other words, at this point in time, the US companies 
are selling more abroad via the internet than foreign business selling to 
US, hence...
Incidentally, the ITU is no longer claiming any interest in the control of 
the root, which few years ago was seen as the way to get their foot in the 
door, for the simple reason that they understand the politics underneath: it 
is a matter of principle, with almost zero real power associated.
What worries me really is the fact that we are risking more with IDN.IDN in 
terms of balkanization of the internet. And there has been an interesting 
discussion on this subject at EGENI 2005.

Regards,
Roberto GAETANO
ALAC
ICANN BoD Liaison




> From: "John R Levine" <johnl@xxxxxxxx>
> To: "Bret Fausett" <bfausett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: "ALAC" <alac@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [alac] US DOC on Internet governance
> Date: 1 Jul 2005 19:24:40 -0400
>
> I happened to be at the ITU all week for the cybersecurity meeting, and
> the point they found notable is that US DOC has no plans to cede its
> oversight role to anyone, ever.  ICANN appeared to think otherwise, but
> now we know better.
>
> Despite the FUD, I don't think the ITU sees itself injecting itself into
> the DNS process other than possibly as a place to host a high level
> intergovernmental oversight committee with more political legitimacy than
> the GAC.  Apparently many governments are not thrilled that a California
> corporation thinks that it gets to tell them what to do, but an oversight
> function via the ITU or other treaty org could address this without
> changing the practical operations much.
>
> Vittorio wrote:
>
> > At the same time, basically all governments of the world, including
> > the European Union, have said repeatedly, clearly and publicly,
> > during the WGIG process, that they will not accept the unilateral
> > control of the root zone any more. So...
>
> Not to hurt your feelings or anything, but the U.S. government doesn't
> care, and I don't see anyone with any leverage to do anything about it.
>
> R's,
> John

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/