[registrars] Business Week column: Representative Boucher

[Nevett, Jonathon]

FYI -- this column appeared today on the Business Week site.  It was
written by a U.S. Congressman from Virginia.

 

Thanks.

 

Jon

 

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2006/tc20060619_108600
.htm

 


JUNE 19, 2006 


Viewpoint


Internet Oversight: A Crucial Test


A pending agreement with VeriSign is anticompetitive and bad for
consumers-and could feed foreign opposition to U.S. control of the Net


When the World Summit on the Information Society in Tunis concluded last
November, the U.S. departed with a diplomatic coup. The U.S. government
convinced Internet policymakers from a range of skeptical-and in some
cases, hostile-nations that the arm's-length policy of U.S. oversight in
a key area of Internet governance is working and is independent of other
U.S. policy formulation. 

The upshot was that the U.S. escaped, for now, an international showdown
over control of the Internet. The U.N. conference was persuaded that the
limited U.S. role in overseeing the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names & Numbers (ICANN) is not only effective but also far preferable to
hands-on control by countries with repressive Internet governance
policies. 

One key to our success at Tunis was the realization that while the U.S.
oversight role is highly limited, it is a meaningful way to ensure that
principles of competition, enforced if necessary by the U.S. government,
will assure that the price of Internet domain-name registrations remains
market-based. 

In coming weeks the viability of this arrangement faces a new test: a
proposal to settle litigation between ICANN and VeriSign (VRSN
<javascript:%20void%20showTicker('VRSN')> ), the company that operates
the .com domain-name registry. How well we handle that test may
determine the level of trust the international community accords to the
U.S. role in Internet governance in the future. 

STOP THE MONOPOLY.  The pending deal, narrowly approved by ICANN's board
in February, raises far-reaching anticompetitive concerns. The proposal
would hand control of the .com registry to one company, VeriSign,
without any reasonable opportunity for rebidding the contract in the
future and without effective limits on the maximum prices charged for
.com registrations. These concerns are all the more alarming because
.com makes up about 75% of domain-name registrations in the U.S. and a
significant percentage globally. 

How will Internet users fare without competition? The proposal would let
VeriSign raise .com registration fees by 7% in most years without cost
justification, meaning .com registry fees would increase as much as 31%
over the next six years (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/12/06, "Will Your Web
Site's Name Cost More?"
<http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/jun2006/sb20060612_435509.
htm> ). Moreover, the proposed settlement would result in perpetual
renewal of the VeriSign contract without future opportunities for
rebidding. 

Allowing market competition instead of guaranteeing a monopoly would not
only lead to a reduction in the fees charged consumers but also would
promote infrastructure investment, including security enhancements.
Indeed, VeriSign itself last year committed to infrastructure upgrades
while agreeing to reduce fees by more than 40% to win an extension of
its contract to operate the .net domain-name registry. 

REPUTATION AT RISK.  The U.S. Commerce Dept., which created ICANN in
1998, has the last word on whether this troublesome settlement agreement
moves forward. But to make this limited oversight meaningful, the
Commerce Dept. must do more than rubber-stamp a proposed pact that has
sparked criticism from every corner of the Internet community. 

The stakes are high. No final decisions were made at the Tunis summit,
which left unresolved questions over potential Internet governance
changes in general, and the role of the U.S. in overseeing ICANN in
particular. These policy issues remain in play as part of the ongoing
follow-up work of the Tunis summit, which created an Internet Governance
Forum. 

Both the Commerce Dept. and ICANN are obligated to promote competition,
consumer choice, and innovation. The proposed .com agreement would
thwart these basic objectives. The .com agreement provides an
opportunity for the U.S. government to show-through leadership and
informed analysis-that the limited oversight of the Commerce Dept. over
ICANN remains both relevant and necessary. The world is watching. 


By Rick Boucher


Boucher represents the Ninth District of Virginia in the U.S. House of
Representatives. A Democrat, Boucher is the co-founder and currently a
co-chair of the Congressional Internet Caucus


 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registrars/attachments/20060619/e377cc0a/attachment.html>