The U.S. government and ICANN have signed a new three year contract that outlines the organization’s first steps towards autonomy. Responding to criticism (and a slew of lawsuits), the new “Affirmation of Responsibilities” lists ICANN’s top three priorities as “Security and Stability”, “Transparency” and “Accountability”. Though the contract signals a “light at the end of the tunnel”, it’s mostly a bunch of compromised ambitions. The most significant change is that ICANN will have full control over their own operations. ICANN will still hold regular meetings with the Department of Commerce, but the government will no longer have authority to dictate key operations. The outlined agreement will be reviewed in 18 months for further recommendation.

The contract was welcomed by the European Commission, but met with skepticism from industry analysts. Many express that they are happy to see the elements of change, but are disappointed by the continued US oversight. The Register brings up a number of concerns about loopholes in the contract, pointing to ICANN’s difficult appeals process, history of empty promises, and lack of commitment to an official release date. Others, especially females within the organization, were unhappy to see the renewal of ICANN’s policy on WHOIS data. Reports Susan Crawford, “I was deeply concerned about the agreement’s apparent wholesale ratification of the DOC’s desire to retain the current WHOIS policy.”

In the opposite corner, a number of critics are calling the agreement too lenient. As reported by PC World, “They believe the organization hasn’t yet proven that it can handle the entire task of domain name management alone, and if the government withdraws now this could compromise security and stability of the Internet.” A thread on Webmaster World debates the issue of control, showing a general distrust for any potential overseer. Whether it is eventually the US, the UN or ICANN itself in charge of the organization, its unclear which would be the lesser of three evils. If anything can be said for the agreement, it manages to displease everyone to a fairly equal degree.

This entry was posted on Monday, October 2nd, 2006 at 2:46 pm and is filed under International, Legal Issues, Technology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.