Comments on: ICANN Considers Security Concerns for Kenya Meeting

By: Domain Name Wire » News » June ICANN Meeting Moves to Singapore - The Domain Industry's News Source

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 06:27:38 +0000

[...] Related posts:ICANN Considers Security Concerns for Kenya Meeting [...]

By: Domain Name Wire » News » Go Daddy, Neustar, IPC Say No to Nairobi Meeting - The Domain Industry's News Source

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:52:06 +0000

[...] has been a major concern for the meeting, but was escalated last week after it became known that a suicide bomb attack was [...]

By: Domain Name Wire » News » ICANN To Hold Pre-Conference Security Calls on Nairobi Meeting - The Domain Industry's News Source

Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:06:12 +0000

[...] was talk that ICANN would move the conference after recent demonstrations around Nairobi, Kenya. Apparently this was prompted because one of the [...]

By: Andrew Allemann

Andrew Allemann — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 01:22:27 +0000

@ John – I heard that the Intellectual Property Constituency said it’s not going to Nairobi. Does that mean gTLDs will finally get pushed through?

By: Breaking - Kenya not posh enough for ICANN meeting - IDN Forums - Internationalised Domain Names

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 23:08:55 +0000

[...] – Kenya not posh enough for ICANN meeting http://domainnamewire.com/2010/01/21…kenya-meeting/ Give me a break, Mexico city is considered safe for a previous meeting? THey will have it [...]

By: John Berryhill

John Berryhill — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:44:37 +0000

Incidentally, the Board has confirmed they are proceeding with the meeting.

I am one of the folks who did not understand the “security concerns” here in the first place. The incident that prompted the recent “concerns” is an internal law enforcement issue in Kenya, and is unlikely to inspire anyone to get excited over something as mundane as ICANN meeting in a conference facility that regularly hosts international meetings of all kinds.

The “security scorecard” thus far is that quite a few meeting participants were mugged in Rio de Janeiro, and one contracted malaria in Ghana.

I agree with the Kenyan blogger’s article to the effect that it is difficult not to suspect that a double standard is at work relative to the “security concerns”. Yesterday, a man was arrested for firing a gun on the steps of the Texas legislature. How many organizations with business in Texas are re-evaluating their plans?

By: titus Ngeno

titus Ngeno — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 02:50:48 +0000

Governance issues
In the Memorandum of Understanding that set up the relationship between ICANN and the U.S. government, ICANN was given a mandate requiring that it operate “in a bottom up, consensus driven, democratic manner.” However, the attempts that ICANN have made to set up an organizational structure that would allow wide input from the global Internet community did not produce results amenable to the current Board. As a result, the At-Large constituency and direct election of board members by the global Internet community were soon abandoned.
It is argued that ICANN was never given the authority to decide policy (i.e., choose new TLDs or shut out other interested parties who refuse to pay ICANN’s US$185,000 fee), but was to be a technical caretaker. Critics suggest that ICANN should not be allowed to impose business rules on market participants, and that all TLDs should be added on a first-come-first-served basis and the market should be the arbiter of who succeeds and who does not.[citation needed]
A member of the European Parliament, William Newton-Dunn, has recently been addressing questions to the European Commission which asks whether ICANN is engaging in restraint of European free trade laws by imposing restrictions on who can operate a TLD and sell domain names.[21] Some restrictions are considered insurmountable by many small business owners and individuals, such as the perhaps-partially-refundable $185,000 application fee.