Interesting People mailing list archives

The Net's Faltering Democracy


From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:01:52 -0500

From: "Simson L. Garfinkel" <simsong () lcs mit edu>



The Net's Faltering Democracy
The Net Effect   By Simson Garfinkel

Why does a corporation with no accountability have so much control over the
Internet?

Critics charge that it is the De Beers of the Internet: an organization that,
like the diamond cartel, has created an artificial scarcity to protect a few
established players. Worse, they say, whatever claims this body once had to
legitimacy were wiped away last year when its board voted to abolish
elections.

This faceless power center is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers, or ICANN. And its actions may jeopardize the future of the Internet.

The Internet could evolve into a global commons where people all over the
world are free to communicate and interact and to distribute and consume an
endless variety of literature and media. Or it could become a tool for
enforcing corporate control and governmental censorship. Which direction the
Internet takes depends in large part on which policies and technologies ICANN
supports.

Many people think the Internet can never be subject to centralized control.
Wasn't this global distributed network built to withstand a thermonuclear
attack? Doesn't it treat censorship as damage and route around it? So goes
popular Net mythology. But in reality, the Internet is a human institution.
And like a corporation, nation, or family, it can be led astray.

Global communication requires global standards, and it is here that the ICANN
has its grip on the system's choke point. This company sets rules that govern
the worldwide assignment of all-important domain names. Its rules are
incorporated into contracts and passed on to anybody who gets a dot-com,
dot-net, dot-org, or dot-info domain. The best-known of these rules is the
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy. If you have a top-level domain
name, you've agreed to this policy. ICANN's glacial pace for establishing new
top-level domains has been a great help to domain registrars such as VeriSign:
they profit from the lack of competition. Because there is a limited number of
registrars and a limited number of top-level domains, the worldwide
domain-name business is directed to the incumbents. The dispute resolution
policy creates procedures that can be used to seize a domain name from one
organization and hand it to another. This policy has been widely hailed as a
boon for trademark holders worldwide.

ICANN's second mode of control is in its ultimate allotment of Internet
Protocol addresses-the Internet's equivalent of phone numbers. Theoretically,
control of domain names and Internet addresses could be exploited for purposes
that range from stifling competition among Internet service providers to
shutting down an entire country's access to the Net. Imagine if instead of
having to take Napster to court, the recording industry had been able to
bypass the courts and shut down Napster simply by nullifying its domain name
and addresses.
None of this would be a big deal if we were talking about an international
organization whose policymaking machinery was responsive to the needs of
Internet users. But that's not the case: ICANN, a private corporation, is
chartered by the state of California and answerable to no one. It is an
outgrowth of the Clinton administration's attempts to privatize control of the
Internet; ICANN's authority comes from a "memorandum of understanding" with
the U.S. Department of Commerce. Handed a letter of agreement and a board of
directors, the corporation was told to go forth and make policy.

The one attribute the U.S. government couldn't confer on this outfit was
legitimacy. The Internet is supposed to be a global resource, so ICANN's
original plan called for Internet users worldwide to elect nine at-large
directors. Those directors, together with nine other directors appointed by
important Internet interest groups, would ultimately craft the policy of the
global information infrastructure.

ICANN was designed to have the efficiency of private enterprise, but it was
somehow supposed to acquire the legitimacy of an elected government. Alas,
this proved to be an impossible task. The election was a flop. Voter
registration took place in the summer of 2000. ICANN says 158,000 Internet
users-far more than had been expected-tried to register. Only 75,000 of them
completed the elaborate verification process, which entailed getting a
personal identification number by e-mail and then typing it into a Web site.
And in the end, only 34,000 people voted in October 2000. But those numbers
actually overstate the level of user participation: in North America,
according to Election.com, the company hired to run the election, a mere 3,449
votes were cast. Karl Auerbach, the candidate elected to represent the United
States and Canada, received 1,725 of those votes. Although that's a majority,
it's an exceedingly tiny fraction of the Internet's user population.

But ICANN need not worry about more sham elections. When the company's board
of directors amended its bylaws last December, it eliminated elections and
instituted an advisory committee-at-large whose members-chosen by other
committees-lack real power. Maybe that's okay. "ICANN is not an experiment in
global online democracy," says Stuart Lynn, ICANN's president and CEO. "So the
board decided that, at least for now, elections were not to go on."

Perhaps ICANN serves as a model for systematically shutting the public out of
messy policy debates and letting the appointed representatives of global
business take over.

Perhaps democracy is overrated.
Simson Garfinkel writes on information technology and its impact. He is the
author of Database Nation (O'Reilly, 2000).


Copyright 2003 Technology Review, Inc. All rights reserved




------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


Current thread: