Many thanks for this post.
Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law
Jamil & Jamil
Barristers-at-law
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
Cell: +923008238230
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
Notice / Disclaimer
This message contains confidential information and its contents are
being communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the
intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this
e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have
received this message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents
above may contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil,
Barristers-at-Law, and constitute privileged information protected by attorney
client privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification
of any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing
it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally
or some other use of this communication) without prior written permission and
consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org
[mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin
Sent: 05 June 2009 04:56
To: bc-gnso@icann.org
Subject: [bc-gnso] FW: Today's ICANN Oversight Hearing
FYI,
this report has just been prepared for posting at the ICA website, www.internetcommerce.org.
Congressional ICANN Oversight Hearing Has A Bipartisan
Theme –
It’s Too Soon To End
On
Thursday, June 4th the House Subcommittee on Communications,
Technology and the Internet held an oversight hearing on “Issues
Concerning the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers”. The
hearing was remarkable in a number of ways. First, given the technically arcane
nature of its subject, the turnout was spectacular – more than half the
Subcommittee’s members on a morning when other hearings competed for
their attention, and a SRO crowd in the very large hearing room of the full
Energy and Commerce Committee. Second, there was remarkable bipartisan
agreement expressed, with Member sentiments falling on a continuum between
extreme concern and “over our dead bodies” as regards the prospect
of termination of the Joint Project Agreement (JPA) between the
The
witnesses appearing before the Subcommittee were:
All witness statements as well as streaming video are
available at http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1642:energy-and-commerce-subcommittee-hearing-on-oversight-of-the-internet-corporation-for-assigned-names-and-numbers-icann&catid=134:subcommittee-on-communications-technology-and-the-internet&Itemid=74
.
Subcommittee Chair Rick Boucher stated at the onset that
the hearing would focus on whether ICANN had become sufficiently transparent
and accountable to let the JPA terminate; and concerns regarding the proposed
introduction of new gTLDs – including enhanced competition, brand
protection, and stability and security. Other Subcommittee members used their
opening statements to raise concerns about ICANN’s burgeoning budget and
staff; question ICANN’s priorities and whether it really cared about
average Internet users; express the view that full independence would threaten
national and global cybersecurity; and note the possibility of potential
capture by the ITU or other entities. While several Members noted that
ICANN’s performance has improved, the prevailing view was that JOA
termination was premature and that at least short term extension, coupled with
some modification of terms, was in order.
Fiona Alexander performed the thankless task of
delivering the Department of Commerce’s views while new Assistant
Secretary for Communications and Information Lawrence Strickling awaits Senate
confirmation. Not only was she a stand-in but she could not indicate the Obama
Administration’s position on JPA extension because that is not fully developed
(and even if a decision has been made, it could hardly be announced in advance
of the June 8th closing of the public comment period that is
supposed to inform and influence the decision). We were concerned by language
in her prepared statement noting that even if the US does not extend the
JPA it will still participate in ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee
(GAC) and will also be able to file comments in ICANN’s public
consultation processes – Mr. Strickling made a similar observation at his
Senate confirmation hearing, but these are hardly reassuring words for those
who are familiar with ICANN decision-making processes, and most certainly do
not equate to a formal oversight role.
Paul Twomey, whose departure as CEO later this year is
already public knowledge, made his usual case for JPA termination to a highly
skeptical Congressional audience – adding the new twist that an extension
of
Most telling, perhaps, were the positions taken by
ICANN’s largest registry and registrar contract parties, VeriSign and
GoDaddy. Ken Silva noted that “while ICANN has continued to make progress
in certain areas…the basic circumstances giving rise to widespread
community concerns over the expiration of the JPA remain largely unchanged and
further progress is critical prior to an expiration of the agreement and end to
all governmental oversight of ICANN.” Christine Jones was even more
blunt: “ICANN has not yet achieved competition, nor the private,
bottom-up coordination and representation called for in the ICANN bylaws. The
JPA between ICANN and the Department of Commerce should be extended or
modified, or renewed and modified, to stress the need to correct these
deficiencies and require a clear roadmap from ICANN as to how it will regain
the confidence of the community on which its existence relies…Unfortunately,
ICANN has yet to commit to or is unable to commit to openness, transparency and
accountability.” When your largest business partners take you to this
type of task in front of Congress you really have major problems.
The temperature in the hearing room rose by several
degrees once the prepared statements were completed and questioning began.
Chairman Boucher found it particularly disturbing that ICANN had never taken
action against an accredited registrar engaged in cybersquatting. Ranking
Republican Cliff Stearns honed in on ICANN finances, questioning whether
ICANN’s fees, budget and staffing were consistent with its non-profit
status, as well as what ICANN would do with the more than $90 million in
application fees for new gTLDs it anticipated receiving. Former full Committee
Chair John Dingell resurrected the issue of the .com contract, with Christine
Jones weighing in that the manner in which it was reached was “not
transparent”. Multiple Members questioned whether new gTLDs would truly
introduce new competition and if ICANN was adequately addressing the problems
they might introduce.
The hearing ended with Chairman Boucher noting that the
record would be kept open for thirty days and that ICANN could anticipate receiving
additional written inquiries.
What does all this mean for the termination or extension
of the JPA? Too much should not be read into this particular episode because
many Congressional hearings involve dramatic posturing and it is the
Obama Administration, not Congress, which will make the ultimate call. But the
strong bipartisan concern about the inconsistency of ICANN’s rhetoric
with the reality of its performance is hardly confined to this Subcommittee
– on May 19th, Senators Olympia Snowe and Bill Nelson, both
serving on the Senate Commerce Committee, sent a joint letter to Commerce
Secretary Gary Locke expressing the view that “ICANN has considerable
work ahead to reach the point where it can stand alone as a stable,
accountable, transparent and, most importantly, secure global
organization” and essentially endorsing the view that the JPA be at least
temporarily extended “to allow time to design and deploy new
accountability mechanisms for ICANN”. Post-hearing press reports indicate
that Chairman Boucher will be joining other Committee members in their own
letter to the Commerce Department recommending a one-year extension.
In short, if the Administration permits the JPA to
terminate in less than four months it is on clear notice that such actions will
unleash a strong bipartisan backlash from the other end of
***************************************
In addition, this report appeared in this asfernoon's
Congress Daily--
HILL
BRIEFS: HOUSE PANEL SEEKS EXTENSION OF ICANN OVERSIGHT
Technology.
House Energy and Commerce Communications Subcommittee members today called for
an extension of the U.S. government's oversight agreement with the nonprofit
that administers the Internet domain name system. The deal is currently slated
to expire Sept. 30. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers is
"far from a model of effective and sustainable self-governance," and
it would be unwise to shrink the government's role, said Rep. John Dingell,
D-Mich. House Energy and Commerce Communications ranking member Cliff Stearns,
R-Fla., plus Reps.
Mike
Doyle, D-Pa., John Shimkus, R-Ill., and Lee Terry, R-Neb., support prolonging
the arrangement between ICANN and the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration, citing transparency and accountability concerns.
House Energy and Commerce Communications Subcommittee Chairman Rick Boucher,
D-Va., is reportedly drafting a letter to NTIA with Stearns and Energy and
Commerce ranking member Joe Barton that recommends a one-year extension. At the
hearing, ICANN President Paul Twomey pointed out that a separate but related
NTIA-ICANN contract will not sunset. He also warned that extending the joint
project agreement would signal that the U.S. government does not have faith in
ICANN's model.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/hbp_20090604_9808.php
Finally,
an excellent series of blogs from the hearing appear at http://domainnamewire.com/category/policy-law/ under
the heading "Congress Beats Up ICANN".
Philip S. Corwin
Partner
Butera & Andrews
1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20004
202-347-6875 (office)
202-347-6876 (fax)
202-255-6172 (cell)
"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey