ICANN At-Large Elections Process 66
ICANN is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. Essentially, they have power over the entire internet addressing system: domain names and IP addresses. People criticize the U.S. FCC for stifling low-power radio, or Congress for trying to ban indecent speech - well, ICANN has more power over communications than either of those entities, and far less accountability.
ICANN's board structure is a complex one. Probably it cannot be fully analyzed except by people devoted to the task full-time. It was designed to give corporations the dominant voice in administering the internet. A great amount of effort has been expended in stacking the deck, making sure that individuals and public interest groups do not gain any significant voice in the process. You've already seen the results of these actions. One such is the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy, which ICANN required all domain name registrars to adopt, and which makes sure that if any corporation covets your domain name, they can take it away without any problems.
But enough of that. ICANN is run by a 19-member Board of Directors. The original members were picked out of the blue (literally; no one knows how the original members were chosen, or , more precisely, whoever knows isn't telling). ICANN has been directed to move to an election process by the Commerce Department, and that's what is now underway.
Of course, the elections also have to be stacked. Business interests have already spoken. They get to pick 9 of the 19 members. Originally, nine more were supposed to be picked by the At-Large membership (that is, the general population of internet users). (The final seat would be the President of ICANN-the-Corporation.) So already, business interests would have had a 10-9 majority on the Board. I say, "would have had", because 10-9 seemed a little too close for comfort, and the At-Large elections have been cut down to just five members, to make sure they wouldn't get too much power compared to the corporate interests in ICANN. Each of ICANN's five geographic regions will elect one member.
(This is the way committees in the U.S. Congress works as well - the political party with a majority in either of the Houses gets a majority on all the committees as well, to ensure that if push comes to shove, their party wins. It is a poor omen for the future to note that corporate interests have a permanent majority in running the internet.)
The At-Large Nomination process is also skewed. The business interests in ICANN get to nominate candidates for the At-Large elections as well, and though it's theoretically possible to get nominated without going through the Nominating Committee (sort of akin to a write-in candidate), the bar is set so high that probably no one will succeed in such a candidacy. So it's likely that the choice of candidates for the At-Large election is going to look something like the choice between Gush and Bore for U.S. President - a choice between business representative X and business representative Y.
Nevertheless, you should get involved. It's your internet that ICANN is governing, and if you plan to spend any time on the net in the future, you'd better speak now. The electorate (the number of people who've registered to vote in ICANN's elections) is extremely small - less than 20,000 people all told. Because of the regional split, the members for Africa and Latin America could be elected with only a few hundred people participating! Your vote will count much more than it would in almost any other election process, and you're controlling the future of the worldwide communications network. It's worth the effort.
A few links:
- Declan McCullagh posted some info on the election process and statistics on the electorate
- ICANNWATCH's comments on the Board elections
- Join Now. The registration process could close at any time.
PIN number (Score:1)
The email had your "PIN number" in it?
Are you the kind of guy who gets his cash from ATM machines, which was deposited when an IBM machine (with an Intel CPU unit) did your payroll, preferably one with lots of RAM memory and a big HD disk that flashes a LED diode whenever its accessed? It that machine on a LAN network that uses the IP protocol? Does it crash whenever someone runs Microsoft MS IE explorer? Would it crash less often if they had used the GNU gcc compiler?
Re:I don't think they'd be too happy about that! (Score:1)
I think they're geeking geek geeked.
Slashgeek, the geeks home.
.
no, actually I don't have a point.
Re:Wow... (Score:1)
"from the one-world-government dept.
BlueCalx- writes "I was pleased this morning when I opened up my mailbox and I found my PIN number"
Question: What does PIN stand for?
Answer: Personal Identification NUMBER!
Question: What do are you saying when you say, "PIN number?"
Answer: You are saying, "... NUMBER number!!!!"
and showing yourself to be both ignorant and redundant.
Vote CmdrTaco for ICANN At-Large (Score:2)
Re:Candidate (Score:2)
...phil
Wow... (Score:3)
Who wants to get elected?
"I think ICANN, I think ICANN"...
I say, screw 'em. What a dumb name. We can set up our own @#*( domain servers, to ensure that little kids, Scottish clans, and small countries (who have already sold their TLD's and pocketed the cash) can get their names before the big corporations do. Nyah nyah.
...or, we could just get a monarchy there, and let Al Gore decide! After all, if we let the Slashdot community run this instead, you know Alan Cox and Hemos would be running the show. (darn slashdot polls!)
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
ICANN f**k up the DNS heirarchy. (Score:1)
Here's my regular DNS heirarchy diatribe. I should put this on a web page somewhere.
The DNS is not being used appropriately.
It's a heirarchical system that has been abused by the registrars to the point where it's effectively a flat naming system; *.com.
End users should not have access to domains above 3rd or 4th level. First, second and maybe even the third level domains should be reserved exclusively for domain administration purposes.
Think of it as a filing system. Would you allow users to randomly create directories off root or
e.g.
microsoft.vendors.software.com
apple.vendors.software.com
opensource.vendors.software.com
ibm.vendors.software.com
microsoft.operating-systems.software.com
apple.operating-systems.software.com
open-source.operating-systems.software.com
amazon.vendors.books.com
barnes&noble.vendors.books.com
waterstones.vendors.books.com
hoover.US.trademarks.org
persil.UK.trademarks.org
fred.new-york.US.plumbers.com
tesco.superstores.shopping.com
asda.superstores.shopping.com
whsmiths.newsagents.shopping.com
menzies.newsagents.shopping.com
You see the kind of thing I mean? Web browser and other software could then *make use* of the structure of the heirarchy.
The DNS needs to be re-organised or even just organised. ICANN and the registrars should design the heirarchy rather than completely abdicating responsibility and allowing chaos to ensue the way they have done.
A properly designed heirarchy would allow everyone to have their place without all this domain squatting and trademark infringement bullshit.
The new TLDs will simply cause more chaos. They will not solve anything. ICANN are just abdicating their responsibilities again. Do you really think that the IBMs, Microsofts and Apples of this world will not simply register their name in every existing TLD? They can, they will and nothing will change.
I really wish I could vote.. (Score:1)
-nick
OK, that was overtly harsh (and, Vote for Me!!!) (Score:2)
Michael,
That was an over-harsh summary. Yes, corporations do represent the majority of ICANN membership, and this does skew things towards the corporation point. However, remember that board members are not supposed to be flunkies - they actually have to know something about the Internet. Look at the IETF - the vast majority of people involved in the IETF are sponsored by their companies to work on a group.
That said, I think we certainly do need to press for more representation, and we certainly need to use what we have.
The Nominating Committee needs to be done away with. All nominations should come from the Community-at-large. We'll have to see if the 10% nomination limit is over-restrictive (I suspect it is, and sometime like a 1% of all elegible voters would probably be better).
Remember, you can only vote for one ICANN member - the one covering your region. However, you can help NOMINATE someone from another region.
That said, I'm going to explore a Self-Nomination run. About the only way I could conceive of something like this working is to get the backing of some large /.-like forum that has a wide reach. USENIX, IEEE, or the ACM, maybe, too.
Just out of curiosity, would any of you vote for me (seriously)?
-Erik
Board of Directors (Score:2)
board of directors
Re:Like a government, we grant them their power. (Score:2)
"Fuck the Brits, we're running the show around here."
"We hate kings, so scrap that idea. Forget taxes without representation. Forget
"Ok, now what? Umm... there's gonna be a president that the people pick and there's gonna be a congress
You get the idea.
In order to "hijack the net back" what would you need to do?
First of all, let everyone know that we're in charge now. Get the names back. That means a group of people, probably academics or researchers or curious other parties, with access to some significant bandwidth would have to set up a loose network of root servers. Then publicize and get lots of people to start using those root servers. The difficult part is the next step... getting people to stop using the existing roots.
After you get the names back... Revert to pristine protocols, pristine policies, etc. This warrants an explanation... Regardless of each of our personal opinions about good and bad, I think we can all agree that certain extensions to various protocols are controversial. For instance cookies. There are lots of widely varying opinions about cookies, informed and uninformed and everything in between. And it's not so much the technology, but what companies like DoubleClick are trying or have tried to do with them. So the "Geek Congress" convenes somewhere and what all the shitty standards are and then scraps those that are.
Next the net has to be taken in a new direction. The corporate interests have taken all things Internet in a certain direction for, I dunno, two or three years now? After we take things back and clean them up, we take the net in a new direction. We write rules like (this is just an example), Slashdot elects one representative, UF elects one, ADM elects one, etc. and then we've got this body of rulemakers who are basicly running the net. And what is their basis of power? Two things: netizens elected them and they control the guts (root servers, standards bodies).
Re:ICANN & The Trademark Attorneys (Score:2)
Sunrise+20 was a back-room, outside-the-process idea cooked up to benefit registries and TM holders. Just like the UDRP is, which was a direct product of WG-A, and was achieved in the same manner: backroom deals, pushed through as the product of the WG, but without WG approval, and ratified by the DNSO names council against the loud outcry of the participants.
I want it to be known far and wide that the result of WG-B, and certain "results" of WG-C (to add new TLDs to the roots) are NOT the product of the WG themselves, but are products of several individuals who think the ICANN process exists to serve their specific interests.
Go read the archives, and see for yourselves. Don't sample them; read through them ALL. WG-A [dnso.org] is supposed to be here, but mysteriously, all but a few messages have vanished. I've just noticed this, and am prepared to raise hell about it.
WG-B [dnso.org] is here. Read through the archives, particularly at the end. Note that those who are not TM attorneys participating to protect their corporate interests are decrying the entire process. Something you'd see in the WG-A archives as well, if they still existed.
WG-C [dnso.org] from Nov. 1999 to present.
Go. Read. Educate yourself. Make up your own mind. And if you think there's something wrong going on here, for crying out loud, GET INVOLVED!
Most of this crap has occurred because of the corporate dominance within ICANN.
Enough with the editorializing guys... (Score:1)
A great amount of effort has been expended in stacking the deck, making sure that individuals and public interest groups do not gain any significant voice in the process.
Bullshit... ICANN is a prefect example of having a leader with no spine (Come on down Ms. Dyson), who has bent over so far so many times in an effort to please everyone, they've effectively paralyzed themselves from making any sort of decision ever.
Overly laborious login process? (Score:1)
I can understand a userid & password
JMHO,
david
Candidate (Score:1)
Re:Block Voting (Score:2)
Re:Block Voting (Score:2)
> have to pay for it...etc? Can you please enlighten me as to the responsabilities?
>
>Oh, yeah, and your qualifications.
They meet all over the world (the next meeting is in Yokohama, Japan), members are not paid, but their travel expenses are covered. (I travel pretty cheap, but I still could not afford frequent trips).
ICANN is responsible for "overall technical management of the Internet"(right, sure...). A board member votes on new rules governing registrars, guidelines on how namespace and addresses are handed out, standard port numbers (although I always that was what RFCs were for), name disputes, and improvements on the Root Server System.
As for why I want to be one... Well, I believe that most of the major figures in the community are major figures because they already have responsibilities to and projects in the community. So, unless they really want to add to their load, they might have to choose between this and whatever they were doing before. I would rather have Cmdr Taco working on Slashdot, or ESR writing that fourth paper. If someone like that were to go for this, I would disappear like fog on a bright day. I have not done anything important for the community and I would like to do so.
What are my pluses and minuses over the average reader? I have almost no conflicts of interest (list: I like slashdot, I have a few relatives that work for companies that contract out to the government, and I am still a student). I have a strong personal set of ethics, my goal in life is to teach CS to 6 through 12, and I know the internet was created because a guy at ARPA did not like having a different terminal for each system he wanted to access (Not to survive nuclear war).
On the other hand, I am getting my bachelor's in CS but I am going to get my master's in Education so I am not fully geek, and my professional experience is limited because I am in my early twenties, and I still have not finished my formal education.
PIN Number... (Score:1)
You got your Personal Identification Number number?
Block Voting (Score:5)
What if Slashdot holds a mock election for those 5 board members, with all Slashdot/ICANN members who participate agreeing to abide by the results and vote that way in the real elections?
That way, our vote will count for much more, since we won't be voting against each other.
This would be especially useful if we can get people helping from Latin America and Africa... Any Slashdot readers from there? We have a shot at influencing the selection of 9 board members, then.
I don't think so (Score:3)
Keep dreaming, pal. ICANN may have a lot of power, sure, but let's not get carried away here. Do you really believe that the Internet is the only, or even the major, means of communication in use today? Sorry, it's one of many. Even though it may be our preferred method, that doesn't mean it's the biggest. The US government's power to limit speech within its borders (First Amendment considerations notwithstanding) goes FAR beyond what ICANN is capable of.
This sort of haranguing from YRO is getting really tiresome.
Re:Wow... (Score:1)
Let me clairify that a bit, how are you supposed to say "PI number"? How are you supposed to pronounce PI, soft I, hard I, as in pie, pea, what?
Question: Whats the 'pee' number?
Answer: One you dummy!
Re:ICANN knows the answer. (Score:2)
Oh? and there will be no commercial sex sites? And businesses in the same country can't have the same name? Good idea though, banishing all business to a separate part of the net.. makes it easier to avoid..
//rdj
Re:ICANN knows the answer. (Score:2)
Ofcourse there are TMed sex sites.. playboy has a TM (probably.. I haven't checked this, it's really just made up). I see the
News at 11: porn movie leaves large slick of KY jelly on alaskan beach
//rdj
Yep, received the postal letter too (Score:3)
I think the key is to -- in as much as the At-Large membership is able to -- rattle the cage of ICANN as much as we can so they remember why they are really there. This is not about power or control or even who'se the smartest one to lead; it's about forging and retaining some real direction, something sorely lacking at this time.
------------------------------------------
Re:TLD's, DNS, and everything. (Score:1)
I'm not sure if I understand perfectly what you're saying, but I believe that you don't understand the basic principles of DNS so well.
First of all, DNS entries do "propagate", but not as you imply.
The way it works:
You set up a "master" server which contains all "zone information", which contains records for a particular domain. You may set up "slave" server which will regularly poll the "master" and transfer the "zone information" and make a local copy.
Therefore, zones only propagate between servers you control. There is no way you can propagate a new TLD.
All lookups (assuming no record caching) must go through the "root servers", which contain information for domains under the TLDs. New TLDs would have to be added there. You have to control those root servers to add a TLD.
It's not just a matter a regulation.
Re:Block Voting (Score:1)
Re:Block Voting (Score:1)
Oh, yeah, and your qualifications.
ICANN Voting (Score:2)
---------------------
www.securitygeeks.com
Re:PIN number (Score:1)
Hey, I have an idea, let's all make the same stupid observation and then flog it to death under the guise of original humour!
Re:Here's a novel idea: journalistic integrity! (Score:1)
Err, hello? Do you read the news or what? Corporations HAVE been either shutting down or acquiring domain names that they wish didn't exist or wish they had first. Though, with the proposal that the
What you fail to realize is that the journalist in question was explaining what *would* happen, not what *is* happening. Of course what's happening right now is not good news. You read almost EVERY WEEK right here on slashdot about some large company beating down a small company, an organization, or even a single person under the disguise of copyright infringement. Right now the most big companies can do is shut down sites that collide with their profit-making ideas. Once there are even more laws and paths that allow them to do more, I believe with every fibre of my being that they will use them to their advantage to control the public.
How long before law no longer applies to an entity labeled as a corporation?
Re:PIN Number... (Score:1)
NIC Card.....DUH!
jas
fairness .... (Score:2)
*ponder
Jon Katz for Board of Directors (Score:1)
--
Be insightful. If you can't be insightful, be informative.
If you can't be informative, use my name
Hmmmm.... (Score:2)
Re:Block Voting (Score:1)
Nominees, anyone???
Re:Wow... (Score:1)
Answer: You are saying, "... NUMBER number!!!!"
and showing yourself to be both ignorant and redundant.
Ah, but it must be right, because even the People Who Know say it that way. From the email I just received:
"Congratulations, your new ICANN At Large Member account has been created. There is just one more piece of information you will need to activate your account: your unique pin number."
Doh!
--
Re:fairness .... (Score:1)
end of the world! (Score:1)
Other TLD's (Score:1)
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
www.npsis.com [npsis.com]
It's your internet... (Score:2)
Hell, you don't even need to rewrite DNS resolution to use anything other than bind, you just need some new TLD servers. Anyone out there have bandwidth to spare? A lot of bandwidth?
The only reason they have the power to put 72 business execs and 1 non-biz-affiliated person on a board is because we give them the power.
Re:Bad pin numbers ?? (Score:2)
Slashdot Nomination (Score:1)
Jim
Hrmm... (Score:1)
www.badassmofo.com [badassmofo.com]
Re:Vote CmdrTaco for ICANN At-Large (Score:1)
Here's a novel idea: journalistic integrity! (Score:2)
When will Slashdot editors start using some journalistic integrity and stop pandering to the paranoid extremes? At best, the above statement is barely true. More probably, it's an outright lie. Can XYZ corporation actually take any domain name they want? Then why hasn't any "corporation" snatched away slashdot.com?
Perhaps when Slashdot editors start to practice honesty and truthfulness in their articles, instead of the ethics of self-interest and paranoia, we'll have some objective reporting. Until then, I'll take most of what I read here with a big grain of salt.
--
Why not someone from Slashdot? (Score:2)
Like a government, we grant them their power. (Score:3)
Voting faux pas (Score:2)
-L
Can't sign up. . . (Score:1)
Cheers
When millions of people break the law, (Score:1)
The Only Effective Way to Get a Real Consumer Rep. (Score:4)
Bad pin numbers ?? (Score:1)
ICANN & The Trademark Attorneys (Score:2)
I submitted this article last week, but it didn't make it through. Since it's an ICANN subject, I'll just attach it here.
News.com [news.com] had an article [news.com] last week about the "Sunrise + 20" proposal from ICANN's Working Group B. It would allow trademark owners to register their mark and up to 20 variations on that mark in the new TLDs that ICANN is proposing -- before the general public has a chance to register a single domain. With over 1 million trademarks registered in the United States alone, the math works out to a possible 20+ million domains being registered before Joe Average gets a shot. (There are 17.5 million .com, .net, and .org total right now.)
The Working Group B comments [dnso.org] regarding the proposal were overwhelmingly supportive -- not too suprising considering it's comprised of mostly trademark lawyers representing folks like Time Warner, Dow Jones & Co., Kodak, Bell Atlantic, Major League Baseball, Intel, 3M, the Motion Picture Association, Viacom, etc.
Re:Vote CmdrTaco for ICANN At-Large (Score:1)
Only 5 days left to comment on ICANN procedure! (Score:1)
http://www.icann.org/mbx/selfnomination [icann.org]
ASAP so that you can say what you think about the current rules for nominating At Large members. Currently, in order for a nominated member to make it onto the ballot, it appears that a nominee must get the nomination vote of 10% or more of the *registered* people in the region. Yes, that's REGISTERED people, not VOTING people.
People should visit the page and speak their mind *politely* and *intelligently* so that the comments actually get read and understood.
TLD's, DNS, and everything. (Score:3)
You know, the more I think about DNS, TLD's and internet name/adress issues, the more I realize that it's really a comfort-issue thing. The logical thing would be to de-regulate TLD's heavily, and in fact the entire way people perceive internet domains.
If company XYZ Holdings wantsThe way people perceive the "Internet" is mostly through URLs, most people use the net for Web browsing and email, and to a smaller extent IRC and other relay-communications protocols like ICQ. Now, these URLs are dreadfully boring and regulated. Why is "www" such an overused hostname? This is something that people CAN control. Why use www? What's the point? Well, simple: It's a comfort zone thing for most internet users. THat's what they're used to, that's what they're comfortable with.
In short, it would be great to de-regulate DNS and create our own TLD's. But unfortunately, because of a defined mindset, most people wouldn't want to, (common internet users).
- Sun Certified Programmer for the Java Platform- Sun Certified System Administrator for Solaris
RIPE format (Score:1)
I for one think that is is past time for NSI to lose their database and adopt the RIPE whois database format.
I'm sure many here would agree.
Voting on TLDs? (Score:2)
.sucks
.god
.atemyballs
.isawebsite
?
Vote Gore for TechOverlord! (Score:2)
Re:Voting on TLDs? (Score:3)
It's bad enough now trying to work out what a company's domain name is. What if they could be under several other tens of TLDs?
Re:PIN Number... (Score:1)
I don't think they'd be too happy about that! (Score:1)
ICANN knows the answer. (Score:1)
I wish to make people aware that ICANN already know the solution to this problem. Dot REG reserved for trademark domains. In format of Name.Class.Reg.Country - ALL businesses would be able to use their name. No cybersquatting, no sex sites and no infringement.
I have a site dedicated to subject at www.WIPO.org.uk [wipo.org.uk] It has no connection with, and wishes to be totally disassociated from the World Intellectual Property Organization.
Re:ICANN f**k up the DNS heirarchy. (Score:1)
ICANN are guided by experts. Not of the Internet - but of trademark law. Which is why they have screwed it up so much. To make as much money out of business as possible. This is not the only reason, of course.
I have a site dedicated to subject at www.WIPO.org.uk [wipo.org.uk] - It has no connection with, and wishes to be totally disassociated from the World Intellectual Property Organization.
For the lawyers: the above is my considered and informed opinion.
Re:ICANN knows the answer. (Score:1)
If they have registered TM, then yes they can use dot REG. Or else use, as has been suggested by many others, dot XXX.
>And businesses in the same country can't have the same name?
Yes, that is called the class.
>Good idea though, banishing all business to a separate part of the net.. makes it easier to avoid..
They are not separated, they are identified as a bona fide business trademark.
Allow Me to Introduce Myself... (Score:1)
Hi. I'm Allan Cox, Open Source advocate, Linux [saltire.org] advocate, and primary coder for Linux's TCP/IP stack. I hope I'm welcome in the SlashDot forums, as til this point, I've been a totally arrogant, antisocial bastard to the community which barely pays for my lifestyle.
In regards to the TCP/IP stack in Linux and my arrogant attitude, I must apologize: as you all already knew, and I just recently admitted to myself, FreeBSD [saltire.org]'s TCP/IP stack is far superior to Linux's, and to top it off, Microsoft [saltire.org] has proven many a time that even the TCP/IP code found in Windows NT [saltire.org] functions better than the drivel I have generated myself. Boy, what a humbler that is! It was like RMS and ESR yelling at me on my own front porch (well it's not really my front porch, it's the landlady's, in front of my one-bed, half-bathroom hovel, but you get the point)!
I'd also like to say, in regards to those who read and post in SlashDot's forums... I am sure I will be seeing Allan Cox. [note the period], Alien Cox, Allan Cocks, Allan Coox, and the like. Please, please, please, for those of you who take SlashDot posting seriously (as I do now, amen!) do not let these crank posters (heretofore to be called "trolls") ruin CmdrTaco's bountiful SlashDot experience! "Trolls" take some delight in confusing the populace and causing disparity in the community. Take the time to learn the real from the fake, as I have (re: how I admitted to myself my TCP/IP stack for Linux actually sucks)!
Thank you.