If you look at the House of Reps grilling of ICANN, there was an underlying theme of “security”, so this appointment doesn’t exactly come as a shock.
Beckstrom spent less than 12 months in the Department of Homeland Security, where he was the Director of the National Cybersecurity Centre. Now ICANN is plugging him as an Internet Security expert! Oh, give me a break!
I don’t believe that less than 12 months in a bureaucratic job puts you in the “expert category”, particularly when you resign after “after learning that orders were canceled for computers, network equipment, furniture and office space in Arlington slated for his group.”
Beckstrom is touting himself as this honest, straight talking guy, so lets see if he does the right thing and cancels these proposed gTLD’s. Action speaks louder than words.
According to Viviane Reding, commissioner for Information Society and Media, ICANN is approaching a historic point in its development, posing the question of whether to become a fully independent organization, accountable to the global internet community. “Europeans would expect so, and this is what we will push for. I call on the US to work together with the EU to achieve this,” Reding said.
September 30 will be a decisive day, as the agreement between ICANN and the US Department of Commerce will expire. The result may result in a more open and independent governance of the internet – or not.
I’d note this ICANN “Return for organisation exempt from income tax” which lists “Paul Twomey (CEO), $691,610 ($255,649 contribution to employee benefit plans)”. Like many people, I think that’s a bit too much for a not for profit. However, the theory goes, that if you want to attract the best talent, then you have to pay the big $$$. I did say theory didn’t I?
The U.S. House Of Representatives Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet recently met to examine issues related to ICANN, including the expiring JPA (Joint Project Agreement) between the Department of Commerce and ICANN, as well as ICANN’s proposed introduction of new generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs).
What Happened?
It was quite entertaining. See for yourself; we have preserved this historical grilling session here:
Testimony of Fiona Alexander, Associate Administrator, Office of International Affairs, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce
ICANN has allowed .biz domain registry NeuStar to grant 1 and 2 character second-level .biz domain names. The domains will be available via an RFP process, with any ungranted domains available via auction.
The nation of Iraq may make a leap into the Internet community with the extension .iq. Iraqi chairman of The National Communications & Media Commission (Siyamend Othmend) said the domain name would allow Iraqis to “stake a virtual flag” in the world of the Web.
The chairman also stated in a letter to ICANN, “It is “an important tangible and symbolic milestone for this nation, as well as the freedom and hopes of the Iraqi people”.
A recent survey cited by the U.S.-led administration in Iraq found that about 6% of Iraqis say they have access to the Internet but fewer than 2% use it regularly.
I wanted to draw your attention to ICANNs “truly independent economic study” of the proposed new TLD’s.
For those reading this, we are going to play a game. When you see the word “independent”, substitute that for the words “seriously conflicted, ICANN sponsored propaganda, marketing piece”. Ok, lets go….
ICANN allegedly commissioned these two independent reports:
Based on feedback from the whole world, ICANN allegedly went back and asked the person who wrote the reports to “supplement his work”. At this point, lets look at part of some feedback given by the European-American Business Council who represent 65 US and European-based global companies.
ICANN should re-evaluate the current plan for new gTLDs, at least insofar as it involves the award of any new gTLDs that comprise trademarks.
In particular, ICANN should pay for a truly independent economic study of the market (instead of commissioning an economic advocacy paper designed to support its wish to rollout new TLDs).
In view of this market analysis, it could be determined whether the goal of the scheme is proportionate to the potential effects of new TLDs on consumers and business owners.
In addition, such an analysis may show that a gTLD expansion (if any) should be limited until adequate, low or no cost safeguards are in place to protect consumers, businesses, and brand owners from brand abuse, confusion and cyber fraud threats.
I’m pretty sure that I don’t have to look too deep into my crystal ball to see what’s going to happen here. It walks like a duck, quacks like a duck…. OMG, you’ll never guess what!
Maybe I’m being overly critical? What do you think?
Thanks to the original post made by Andrew Allemann that inspired me to write this.
Its been a year since auDA changed the rules to allow people to buy and sell Australian domains names.
So, what’s happened since then? My friends at Netfleet clocked up 30,000 domains, 1,500 offers and 105 transactions. Not bad when 99.9% of the population doesn’t understand the basic concept that you can buy/sell these things.
Just to put the icing on the cake; this week mortgage.net.au apparently sold for $13,500! I nearly fell off my chair when I read this – FOR A .NET.AU ? What the? Others include jeweller.com.au for $14,767 and freestuff.com.au for $18,700.
So, at least we are off to a start. It certainly wasn’t the big bang that people said it would be. Why am I not surprised? Despite being an Aussie, I personally haven’t been a fan of the .com.au namespace, but I am warming up to it….
Of course things would be better if the Australian government changed the backward, dysfunctional, judge, jury and executioner, “regulator” who is continuously in the media for all the wrong reasons, making Australia a complete joke on the world stage. Here are a few quotes from recent articles:
“Cheyne Jonstone, of Cove Business Technology, has also called on Senator Conroy to sort out the mess….Senator Stephen Conroy needs to act now and act quickly. The government appointed this body to implement policy and regulate the .au domain name space, but their actions of late demonstrate that they are failing to do that adequately, or more importantly, the actions of their CEO, Chris Disspain.”
“Larry Bloch, CEO and co-founder of Netregistry says Chris Disspain of auDA has acted as judge, jury and executioner by cancelling Bottle Domains’ accreditation so suddenly, here he talks to CRN about how this action is now proving to be grossly negligent.”
“auDA chief Chris Disspain gave iTnews a categoric “no” when asked if the regulator would consider settling the case before it goes to trial on 24th June….. He also said the regulator had a strong enough cash position – some $4.3 million in reserves – to back up a further unfavourable ruling from the Victorian Supreme Court.”
Should auDA exist in its current form? Should there be protests at ICANN’s 35th meeting in Sydney this month, calling for the Australian government to step in, use their reserve powers in relation to domain names (under the Telecommunications Act 1997) and remove auDA? Perhaps transfer it to ACMA or another body, with more experience, that’s truly representative of the industry.
ICANN is apparently embarking on a million dollar campaign to convince us to buy their story on generic domains. Its reported that the campaign will start in Q4 2009 with a series of announcements and PR.
The Australian is reporting that Dr Twomey said an independent panel would be appointed to decide who would be allowed to register a disputed domain, but no details were available about who might be on it. I’m sure its going to be “fair and balanced” – just like Fox news.
Best of luck to the ICANN Executive who are no doubt practicing their Jedi mind tricks – “these arent the domains droids your looking for”.
What do you think? Is $1million a waste of funds? After all, its 5,000,000 ICANN .20 cent fees for a .com!
Add this to the “Realized and unrealized investment losses of $4.7 mil thru year to date” which was very quietly disclosed in the unaudited financial results. Click on the down arrow on the left hand side of the graph and you will see a little pop-up that mentions this little gem!
Who in ICANN is being made accountable for this investment loss?
WIPO has sent a letter to ICANN to “seriously consider moving towards an essentially paperless UDRP”. Here are some interesting stats that appear in the letter:
Over the lifespan of the UDRP, the total number of pages filed with WIPO alone is estimated at some ten million (roughly equivalent to over one thousand trees).
The approximate number of paper pages from Respondents is over 300,000.
The letter outlines a number of reasons including:
Environmentally friendly
Efficient – leading to cost savings
Most already file electronically anyway
4% email bounce back in 2008
The average time that elapsed between WIPO’s receipt of the electronic Compalint and its receipt of the hard copies was four days. “A delay in receipt of a Response in hard copy may also delay the Panel’s review of the complete record“.
I think this is a great move. Although I’m not surprised that its WIPO taking the initiative to suggest an improvement to an ICANN process. It just goes to show how inefficient ICANN is.
Although this week I did have similar, strange technology interactions with two companies:
Company A – a webhost asked me to print out, scan in and email them a copy of an invoice that I received via email. Apparently their process said that email (text) wasn’t good enough.
Company B – asked me to email them, post a hardcopy and fax them the same document.
Its 2009 and we are still using fax machines and printing stuff out – unbelievable. Shouldn’t we all have jet-packs by now?
Fatal error: Call to undefined function the_subscribe_links() in /home/wwwdoma/public_html/news/wp-content/themes/domainerincome/sidebar.php on line 159
As we suspected, 
I wanted to draw your attention to ICANNs “truly independent economic study” of the proposed new TLD’s.
Ok, lets go….
Its been a year since auDA changed the rules to allow people to buy and sell Australian domains names.
What do you think? Is $1million a waste of funds? After all, its 5,000,000 ICANN .20 cent fees for a .com!