Re: [ga] Paul Twomey, DoC, and Verisign

["Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It's interesting that when Joe Sims was trying to trash my writing about 
ICANN, he usd to deny that DoC had any influence on ICANN's decisions at 
all....

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005, Richard Henderson wrote:

> Paul Twomey speaking at the ICANN Public Forum: "We have been engaged in a three-party negotiation... we have been required to consult and seek advice from DoC..."
>
> Why is it rather unnerving for the rest of the world that the granting of the most significant TLD to a US corporation may hinge on the interventions of a US government agency?
>
> Is there any open and transparent documentation of precisely what DoC has said, and what pressures or "advice" may have been brought to bear?
>
> This almost "done deal" seems to exclude competitive bidding and competitive alternatives that might drive down price, seems to exclude the opportunities of other companies beyond the USA, seems to exclude the prevailing sentiment and views of most constituencies in the ICANN framework.
>
> Is this an example of why 'Internet Governance' should not be accountable to a controlling department of a single nation-state?
>
> Why should the US's DoC have *any* say in the determination of the best interests of the Worldwide Internet Community and its DNS functions? Why should the DoC act as what Paul Twomey describes as a "third party" in the contract negotiations with Verisign?
>
> Yrs,
>
> Richard Henderson

--
http://www.icannwatch.org   Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@xxxxxx
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                       -->It's warm here.<--