Internet: European Commissioner calls for completion of the privatisation of ICANN

[ec] Have you ever asked yourself who actually is in charge of ensuring that millions of computers can connect to each other 24 hours a day? And who decides on new top level domains in addition to the existing ones, such as ".com", ".fr", ".de" or ".eu", we can have? Who decides on the price that domain name registries and end-users should pay for new domain names? Who, in the last instance, guarantees the stability and openness of the internet for users in the whole world?

Today the main player in all those decisions is ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. ICANN is also entrusted with the IANA functions managing the root of the internet, the Internet's core directory.

What is ICANN? ICANN is a private not-for profit corporation established in California. Since it was created more than 10 years ago, ICANN has been working under an agreement with the US Department of Commerce. At the moment, the US government is the only body exercising some oversight over ICANN. I believe that the US, so far, done this in a reasonable manner. However, I also believe that the Clinton administration's decision to progressively privatize the internet's domain name and addressing system is the right one. In the long run, it is not defendable that the government department of only one country has oversight of an internet function which is used by hundreds of millions of people in countries all over the world.

I hope that now, after some hesitations about this by the US over the past 8 years, President Obama will now continue the work started by the Clinton administration. A moment of truth will come on 30 September this year, when the current agreement between ICANN and the US Government expires. This opens the door for the full privatisation of ICANN; and it also raises the question of to whom ICANN should be accountable, as from 1 October.

Accountability of ICANN is a must. Let us not forget that ICANN, in the end, has the unique position of a global quasi-monopoly. The global nature of the internet is its very strength and it certainly requires global management. But monopolies always involve the risk of abuse. So to whom should ICANN be accountable? Who should ensure that principles of fair competition and end-user interests are taken into account in
ICANN decisions? Who should make sure that ICANN works only for the global freedom of the internet, and never lends its hand to censorship or the suppression of ideas?

After many talks with ICANN itself, representatives of different US administrations and with stakeholders from around the world, I, personally, would like to see the following model of internet governance evolve after 30 September

COMMISSIONER REDING’S WEEKLY VIDEOMESSAGE THEME: "The Future of Internet Governance: Towards an Accountable ICANN" 4 May 2009