Comments on: Interview: Rod Beckstrom on Affirmation of Commitments

By: Rod Beckstrom To Leave ICANN After End of Term - Domain Name Wire

Rod Beckstrom To Leave ICANN After End of Term - Domain Name Wire — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 00:04:44 +0000

[...] been an interesting couple years since he joined the organization. Shortly after he started ICANN gained some independence from the U.S. government. But the relationship with the U.S. government has been sour as the group [...]

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:28:03 +0000

@ Domain Investor – I think the U.S. gov. could use its muscle on the VeriSign contract. That said, the pricing clause is one of the most dangerous clauses in the new TLD contracts. Make sure to make your voice heard.

By: Domain Investor

Domain Investor — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:15:42 +0000

If they roll out the new gtlds next year and permit the price escalation clause, I assume Verisign could impliment it starting in 2011. Just about when the new contract takes effect.

And, the U.S. gov’t couldn’t prevent it. ???

By: M. Menius

M. Menius — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:33:52 +0000

I wonder how much accountability really exists. Seems to me that ICANN’s persistent push for their windfall gTLD’s was the litmus test for whether they’re really answerable to anyone.

That so many people, high level corporations, and even government institutions spoke out together against the new gTLD’s suggest to me that ICANN will follow their own agenda while paying lip service to the majority dissenters. With no recourse … as of yet.

By: George Kirikos

George Kirikos — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:00:45 +0000

Andrew: Agreed, ICANN can pretend that it is master of its own destiny, but a lot remains to be seen over the coming years. The bottom-line remains that the US is in control (which is a good thing, in my opinion).

We’ll know what the new agreement really means when ICANN attempts to do controversial things. The first “test” might be over the .xxx issue, depending on the outcome of that arbitration (that might make an interesting inteview, if the ICM Registry people are in a chatty mood!).

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:51:47 +0000

@ George – I agree, and ICANN rightly doesn’t want to point out the IANA contract today. It wants the world to know it’s no longer under control of the U.S. government. Perhaps more symbolic than anything else.

By: George Kirikos

George Kirikos — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:39:23 +0000

As you rightly said, the “teeth” is the fact that the US government still retains 100% control over the IANA Function contract, which expires in 2011, as I discussed on the Business Constituency mailing list:

http://forum.icann.org/lists/bc-gnso/msg00483.html

That’s the contract where the true control over the root zone file is determined. I expect that the US government will retain control over the IANA function contract indefinitely, as an insurance policy in case ICANN goes rogue.