| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| ICANN Takeover | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 1 2016, 10:48 AM (257 Views) | |
| Rainman | Oct 1 2016, 10:48 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
Editorial Copy/paste of a portion from the editorial:
I've read a few articles, but can't figure out what or why this is happening. Those of you in tech fields, are you aware of this, and, does it matter? |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Oct 1 2016, 11:16 AM Post #2 |
|
Shortstop
|
Of course it matters. The president hates the United States and this is payback. Elections have consequences - even historic ones. |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| TomK | Oct 1 2016, 11:22 AM Post #3 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I have to believe you Copper. It isn't like the world is a free place open to all sorts of different ideas. For the most part major players like China and Russia are opposed to any real open Internet. Are we to had the hand the Internet over to them? Just stupid. |
![]() |
|
| Luke's Dad | Oct 1 2016, 11:34 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
Transformational! |
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Oct 1 2016, 11:36 AM Post #5 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
What's happening? What's changing? The US government was the one who founded ICANN. For almost two decades, the US has contracted ICANN to manage the allocation of IP addresses and a bunch of domain-name-to-address translation functions. In theory, the US could have rescinded the contract with ICANN and give the contract to some other entity to perform the same functions. But the US never has, so ICANN has been performing those functions for close to two decades. KEY POINT: the US government has had close to two decades to assess ICANN and work with ICANN to do those things, so we know very well how it works and how well it works. What’s changing is that instead of relying on the "contract" mechanism to let ICANN perform those functions, the US government will just "skip" the contract mechanism and let ICANN does the same things it has been doing for close to two decades. Is this move supported by private entities who are most dependent on the Internet? The answer is Yes. See this letter of support, for example: http://www.ccianet.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/IANA-Letter.pdf ... Amazon, Facebook, Google, GoDaddy, Twitter, Yahoo ... all these Internet giants, all these marquee American companies are in support of the transition. From that, you should be able to tell that the American businesses are largely OK with this. Does it matter? It doesn’t matter to the Internet’s day-to-day operation in the sense that, transition or not, the Internet would still be working the same way as it has been in close to two decades when the US government contracted the function to ICANN. ICANN will still be doing the same things, just no longer formerly under the framework of a "contract." It matters symbolically in the sense that "the Internet" can now be seen as independent, non-governmental, not under the control of any single government. And one more thing ... ICANN as an organization is organized under the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law and is headquartered in California. Unless it reorganizes and moves its HQ elsewhere, it’s still subject to the law of California. So, transition or not, it’s not like ICANN all of the sudden is free from constraint of American laws. So, relax ... the sky is not falling. |
![]() |
|
| Rainman | Oct 1 2016, 12:07 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
Why "fix" something not broken? Anyway:
Is there a guarantee that ICANN will remain in the U.S., "suject to the law..." as you state it? Any reason ICANN could not move to some other country, where freedom of speech is not in the host country constitution? |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Oct 1 2016, 01:46 PM Post #7 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
No guarantee whatsoever. ICANN holds no physical asset that would allow it to physically control the Internet. To the extent that it "governs" or "coordinates" various facets of the Internet, it does so only to the extent that those who hold the physical assets (e.g., server hardware, fiber optic cables, communications satellites) adhere to rules/guidelines and address allocations set by ICANN. ICANN today resides in the US, yet China and Russia and North Korea has no problem restricting "speech" on the Internet in their respective territories. That should show you that ICANN today can neither guarantee nor deny "freedom of speech," nor will it be able to in the foreseeable future. If the people in ICANN ever goes bat****-anti-American-crazy, Americans who owns the physical assets (think of all the switches and optical fibers and servers and cable lines and communications satellites owned/operated by AT&T and Verizon and Comcast and Sprint and Google and Amazon and Microsoft, etc.) can then give ICANN our collective middle finger and institute ICANN 2.0 to safeguard American interests. (This is not easy, but neither will it be easy for ICANN to pull up stakes and just leave the US.) The real power rests with the people who own/operate the physical assets, not with the bureaucrats/technocrats working in ICANN. Now I circle back to you first question: why "fix" what is not broken? Because the USA promised the world back when it formed ICANN that it will one day make this transition. That's been the plan and the promise since ICANN's formation. Three Presidents and multiple sessions of Congress all know about this. The world took our word for it and developed their parts of the Internet on the back of this promise, honoring ICANN's rules/regulations and address allocations. No other country has developed a parallel/competing ICANN-like entity "just in case" we Americans decide to "take the Internet away" from them. We benefited from the rest of the world playing by ICANN's rule. Our technology and Internet companies sold tons and tons stuff and get access to consumers around the world via the global Internet that plays by the same rule. Right now, practically every government of the free world is in favor of having a geopolitically independent ICANN. The only governments that want nationally controlled ICANN-like entities are the likes of China and Russia. We renege on our promise to the world and we give Russia and China an excuse to press their case for national government controlled ICANN-like entities. Best to keep our word. |
![]() |
|
| Rainman | Oct 1 2016, 06:43 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Fulla-Carp
|
Thanks, Ax. I appreciate your expertise in this area. From the articles I read, seems there is a chance (or desire) that this will end up in the U.N. Just to refresh, the U.N. is a remarkable organization, where the best respective countries are represented where they have the most historical wisdom for input:
|
![]() |
|
| George K | Oct 1 2016, 06:46 PM Post #9 |
|
Finally
|
Fear not, we will still pay 20-25% of the bill.
|
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Oct 1 2016, 08:23 PM Post #10 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Yeah ... there are people in NATO countries who have read articles that suggest that there is a chance (or desire) that the US will start charging them for "protection" too.
|
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |








4:59 PM Jul 10