[governance] [govenance] The domain name racket goes on

parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Fri Sep 26 21:04:33 EDT 2014

Whether ICANN should continue with domain name functions or whether ITU 
should take them over is a bit of a self-serving strawman argument. I 
have not seen any serious proposal with any serious backing in this 
regard. What is often sought however by developing countries, with 
serious proposals on the table as well, is to subject ICANN to a 
genuinely international oversight mechanism which is embedded in 
international law and its authority.


On Saturday 27 September 2014 02:25 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> As I read through all the email discussions, I could not help 
> wondering whether there should be greater awareness done on the roles 
> of stakeholders within the ecosystem. The content of the discussions 
> in relation to domain name racket I could not follow through properly 
> but whilst people are still putting all their eggs in the domain name 
> basket with the gTLD process, hardly anyone talks about the dotless 
> domains and the implication for the current value of the domain name. 
> Can the domain name and dotless domain name be likened to PSTN and NGN 
> in terms of transition? Is it inevitable that the world will shift 
> from domains to more dotless domains or are dotless domains are just a 
> fly by night.
> Personally I prefer ICANN over ITU any day in terms of being open to 
> hearing the voices of diverse community. ICANN has built in mechanisms 
> for input into various processes. ITU on the other hand remains a 
> closed trunk available only to Governments, Regulators and ICT Private 
> Sector who can afford it, and they have no capacity to be flexible to 
> absorb civil society. In terms of accountability, ICANN leads as all 
> its reports are published open and online and available for easy 
> access by anyone except /some/ of the SSAC reports.
> However, I can also understand why, sometimes being the oldest UN 
> organisation can make this resistant to change to be more relevant 
> with the dynamics of time. ITU has done fantastic work building and 
> developing toolkits for diverse initiatives within the ICT space and 
> should be commended.
> The ITU has also begun using multistakeholder in their various 
> speeches just as ICANN does for some time now.
> However, despite my preferences, I can say that both organisations 
> have greater room for even more improvement. However, to do that we as 
> civil society must first get our act together and figure out 
> architecturally, the kind of changes we would like to see happening in 
> the ecosystem to amplify the voice of the common man and the inclusion 
> of *ALL* our voices.
> At the same time, we have to come to the realisation that we can treat 
> and respect individual organisations as unique with distinct roles and 
> mandates and perhaps that will make us less likely to try to want to 
> fit square pegs in round holes.
> :)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140927/80350491/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:

For all other list information and functions, see:
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

More information about the Governance mailing list