Mark Gritter (markgritter) wrote,
Mark Gritter
markgritter

Revenge of the XXX TLD

The IGP blog reports that ICM Registry, who tried to get a ".xxx" top-level domain from ICANN in 2004, has posted its filings for an independent review panel which will decide whether ICANN acted improperly. ICANN initially approved the domain in a vote taken in 2005, but changed its mind due to political pressure and eventually killed the application in 2007. (This is the first such test of an independent review process ICANN set up.)

There's some interesting insight into the working of ICANN, although not all that surprising. Liz Williams was on one of the panels evaluating new TLD proposals; her committee recommended rejecting all but two (.CAT and .POST.). Her statement says:

20. ICANN learned of our conclusions in advance of our final report, and was clearly disappointed that we intended to recommend that so few applications should proceed to the next step in the process: registry agreement negotiations. At that time, certain ICANN staff, including Kurt Pritz, an ICANN Vice President, and John Jeffrey, ICANN's General Counsel, were very clear that they wanted as many applications as possible to advance to the next stage of the process, and encouraged us to be more positive in our assessments in order to achieve that goal. I believe that they viewed the new sTLD application process as a means to demonstrate ICANN's prestige and importance as an international organisation; therefore the process had to be seen as successful--- meaning lots of new sTLDS--- so that it would appear that ICANN was in control of a valuable resource, and so that future rounds would attract more applicants. At the time, it was perhaps more important to them that the process result in as many new sTLDs as possible that it was that the criteria be applied correctly to the applications.


I think this gets to the heart of the problems with the new TLDs. They don't have community backing, nor wide acceptance in practice. Their creation is not guided by the interests of Internet users, but by rent-seeking on the part of both registries and ICANN.
Tags: dns, policy
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments