Can ICANN Cope?
As the Internet’s commercial potential caught on in the 1990s, the flood of new users and Web sites created two intrinsic challenges. On the one hand, it underscored the need for a centralized system to create and keep track of domain names. On the other, it raised the question of how any such system can ...
As the Internet's commercial potential caught on in the 1990s, the flood of new users and Web sites created two intrinsic challenges. On the one hand, it underscored the need for a centralized system to create and keep track of domain names. On the other, it raised the question of how any such system can best reflect the wider public interest in the Internet's future shape. The former challenge gave rise to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) (www.icann.org). The latter may be its downfall.
As the Internet’s commercial potential caught on in the 1990s, the flood of new users and Web sites created two intrinsic challenges. On the one hand, it underscored the need for a centralized system to create and keep track of domain names. On the other, it raised the question of how any such system can best reflect the wider public interest in the Internet’s future shape. The former challenge gave rise to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) (www.icann.org). The latter may be its downfall.
Many Internet users still aren’t sure what exactly ICANN is. One of ICANN’s fiercest critics (and now at-large board member), Karl Auerbach, once called it "a new experiment in international government.” It does lay claim to the authority (however controversial) to set guidelines resolving disputes between trademark holders and owners of similar domain names anywhere in the world. Critics argue, though, that ICANN is not accountable the same way real governments are. And some see ICANN as merely a standard-setting organization that regulates some technical aspects of the Internet and decides what companies can register domain names. Indeed, ICANN has characteristics of both.
No matter how you split the fiber-optic hairs, ICANN is likely to have a profound impact on the future of the World Wide Web. Out of concern for its potentially vast influence, three law- and technology-savvy professors founded ICANN Watch in June 1999 (www.icannwatch.org). The site itself is a news and comment forum with "no particular viewpoint to push or axes to grind," where participants analyze ICANN’s every action.
One perennial topic is ICANN’s governance structure. The corporation’s embattled board of directors has changed dramatically since ICANN was created in October 1998 at the request of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Facing criticism over the appointment system for its nine directors, ICANN doubled the board’s size and included five directors to be selected through an unprecedented global online ballot.
In the election’s aftermath, the independent NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS) set out to review the voting process (www.naisproject.org) and promises a final report in September. While many Internet users question ICANN’s legitimacy, there is consensus on at least one point: ICANN will be under intense scrutiny for some time to come.
More from Foreign Policy
Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.
The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.
Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.
How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
