Jump to content

Sandbox

From ICANNWiki
Revision as of 18:37, 27 February 2017 by Dustin Loup (talk | contribs)

Organization & Structure[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D1 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D1 edit source]][edit | edit source]

It is central to ICANN's mission that the organization itself is structured in a way that welcomes a variety of voices and seeks to represent the extremely diverse constituencies with continued interest in the Internet's development, from [/icannwiki.org/Registry registries], to [/icannwiki.org/Category%3ACompanies corporations], to individual Internet users. In relation to ICANN's structural development, there have been critics who have taken issue with its closed-door sessions, the role of the [/icannwiki.org/DOC U.S. Department of Commerce], and other structural and procedural rules.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-4 [4]] ICANN has been described as being in a contentious oversight situation; with some countries calling for all U.S. influence to be removed from the organization by subordinating it to the U.N.'s jurisdiction, or suggesting similar solutions.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-5 [5]] ICANN's structure and process is outlined in the [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Bylaws ICANN Bylaws].

Board of Directors[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D2 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D2 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board ICANN Board]

ICANN is governed by a [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board Board of Directors] made up of 15 voting members,[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-6 [6]] and the President and CEO, who is also a voting member. The board is further aided by five non-voting liaisons.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-bylaws-7 [7]] From ICANN's inception to December 2011, being a board member was a voluntary position. At that time, the [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board ICANN Board] responded to mounting pressure regarding conflicts of interest and the notion that compensation would create a more professional and accountable body by awarding themselves a $35,000 annual salary.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-dotnxt-8 [8]]

Current Board of Directors[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D3 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D3 edit source]][edit | edit source]

The 19 current directors and the current CEO, are listed below, along with the organization which nominated them and the length of their term:[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-9 [9]]

  • [/icannwiki.org/Fadi%20Chehad%C3%A9 Fadi Chehadé], President and CEO
  • [/icannwiki.org/Steve%20Crocker Steve Crocker] (Chair), selected by the [/icannwiki.org/NomCom NomCom], Nov. 2008 - [/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2014
  • [/icannwiki.org/Bruce%20Tonkin Bruce Tonkin] (Vice-Chair), selected by the [/icannwiki.org/GNSO GNSO], June 2007 - [/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2016
  • [/icannwiki.org/Rinalia%20Abdul%20Rahim Rinalia Abdul Rahim], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/ALAC ALAC], October 2014-[/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2017
  • [/icannwiki.org/Cherine%20Chalaby Cherine Chalaby], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/NomCom NomCom], Dec. 2010 - 21 November 2013
  • [/icannwiki.org/Chris%20Disspain Chris Disspain], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/CcNSO ccNSO], June 2011 - [/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2014
  • [/icannwiki.org/Asha%20Hemrajani Asha Hemrajani], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/NomCom NomCom], October 2014-[/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2017
  • [/icannwiki.org/Wolfgang%20Kleinw%C3%A4chter Wolfgang Kleinwächter], selected by [/icannwiki.org/NomCom NomCom], November 2013 – Annual General Meeting 2015
  • [/icannwiki.org/Markus%20Kummer Markus Kummer], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/GNSO GNSO], October 2014 – Annual General Meeting 2017
  • [/icannwiki.org/Bruno%20Lanvin Bruno Lanvin], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/NomCom NomCom], November 2013 – Annual General Meeting 2016
  • [/icannwiki.org/Erika%20Mann Erika Mann], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/NomCom NomCom], Dec. 2010 - 21 November 2016
  • [/icannwiki.org/Ram%20Mohan Ram Mohan], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/SSAC SSAC] since 2008
  • [/icannwiki.org/Gonzalo%20Navarro Gonzalo Navarro], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/NomCom NomCom], Oct. 2009 - [/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2015
  • [/icannwiki.org/Raymond%20A.%20Plzak Raymond A. Plzak], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/ASO ASO], May 2009 - [/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2015
  • [/icannwiki.org/George%20Sadowsky George Sadowsky], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/NomCom NomCom], Oct. 2009 - [/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2015
  • [/icannwiki.org/Michael%20Silber Michael Silber], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/CcNSO ccNSO], May 2009 - [/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2015
  • [/icannwiki.org/Kuo-Wei%20Wu Kuo-Wei Wu], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/ASO ASO], April 2010 - [/icannwiki.org/Annual%20Meeting AGM] 2016
  • [/icannwiki.org/Thomas%20Schneider Thomas Schneider], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/GAC GAC], First GAC Meeting 2015 – First GAC Meeting 2017
  • [/icannwiki.org/Jonne%20Soininen Jonne Soininen], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/IETF IETF], 2013 – Annual General Meeting 2015
  • [/icannwiki.org/Suzanne%20Woolf Suzanne Woolf], selected by the [/icannwiki.org/RSSAC RSSAC]

Current Non-Voting Liaisons[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D4 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D4 edit source]][edit | edit source]

  • [/icannwiki.org/Heather%20Dryden Heather Dryden], [/icannwiki.org/GAC GAC] liaison
  • [/icannwiki.org/Suzanne%20Woolf Suzanne Woolf], [/icannwiki.org/RSSAC RSSAC] liaison
  • [/icannwiki.org/Ram%20Mohan Ram Mohan], [/icannwiki.org/SSAC SSAC] liaison
  • [/icannwiki.org/Francisco%20da%20Silva Francisco da Silva], [/icannwiki.org/TLG TLG] liaison
  • [/icannwiki.org/Jonne%20Soininen Jonne Soininen], [/icannwiki.org/IETF IETF] liaison

GNSO[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D5 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D5 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/GNSO GNSO]

The [/icannwiki.org/Generic%20Names%20Supporting%20Organization Generic Names Supporting Organization] (GNSO) brings together smaller stakeholder groups, which in turn bring together constituencies and other groups, together into one [/icannwiki.org/SO Supporting Organization] to develop policies, form consensus, and make recommendations related to [/icannwiki.org/GTLD gTLDs] to the [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board ICANN Board].[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-10 [10]]

ccNSO[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D6 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D6 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/CcNSO ccNSO]

The [/icannwiki.org/Country%20Code%20Names%20Supporting%20Organization Country Code Names Supporting Organization] (ccNSO) is an advisory body within ICANN created by and for [/icannwiki.org/CcTLD ccTLD] managers, which are the entities that oversee a given nation's own Country Code Top Level Domain. The ccNSO is a consortium of working groups and the ccNSO Council, and it works in conjunction with other supporting organizations and bodies within ICANN. It was founded in 2003. It is a forum for global discussions and debates regarding issues related to ccTLDs.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-11 [11]]

ASO[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D7 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D7 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/ASO ASO]

The [/icannwiki.org/Address%20Supporting%20Organization Address Supporting Organization] (ASO) is one of the supporting organizations that was formed, according to ICANN's bylaws, through community consensus in 1999. The main objective of the ASO is to review and develop [/icannwiki.org/IP Internet Protocol] recommendations, address policy, and advise the [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board ICANN Board].[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-12 [12]] Its members are appointed by the world's 5 [/icannwiki.org/RIR Regional Internet Registries] (RIRs), which manage and allocate IP addresses in their respective continental regions.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-13 [13]][/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-14 [14]]

Process[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D8 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D8 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Meetings[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D9 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D9 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Meetings ICANN Meetings]

ICANN holds week-long meetings three times per year; one of these meetings serves as the organization's annual meeting, where new board directors take their appointed seats. These meetings are held in a different location each time, with each global region hosting a meeting before the regional cycle is started anew.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-meetings-3 [3]] The next meeting will be the 53rd meeting in Buenos Aires, Argentina. [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-15 [15]]

Meetings officially begin on a Monday, though some [/icannwiki.org/SO supporting organizations] meet prior to this, and run through Friday.

A fellowship program is in place to bring in individuals who have a desire or need to attend but do not have the financial backing to attend on their own.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-16 [16]]

Review Processes[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D10 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D10 edit source]][edit | edit source]

ICANN has mechanisms in place for any individual or entity to solicit a reappraisal of any board decision that affects them. The [/icannwiki.org/Board%20Governance%20Committee Board Governance Committee] is in charge of reviewing all reconsideration requests, which are submitted electronically and must be responded to within 30 days. The boards actions are also reviewed by an [/icannwiki.org/IRP Independent Review Panel], which has the power to call attention to discrepancies between the [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Bylaws bylaws] and actions taken by the board, and recommend that the board readdress certain issues. Furthermore, ICANN's structure and operations, including every supporting organization and committee, is also subject to occasional reviews.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-bylaws-7 [7]]

History: The Beginning[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D11 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D11 edit source]][edit | edit source]

On July 1st, 1997, U.S. President Bill Clinton directed the Secretary of Commerce to privatize the management of the [/icannwiki.org/DNS DNS], which had heretofore been managed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ([/icannwiki.org/DARPA DARPA]), the National Science Foundation ([/icannwiki.org/NSF NSF]) and other U.S. research agencies.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-17 [17]] The goal was to open the Internet to greater international participation, and to bolster it as a new medium of commercial competition and exchange.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-icann-mou-1 [1]]

On July 2nd, the [/icannwiki.org/DOC Department of Commerce] requested public input regarding [/icannwiki.org/DNS DNS] administration and structure, policy input regarding new registrars and the creation of new [/icannwiki.org/TLD TLDs], and concerns regarding trademarks. More than 1,500 pages of comments were received.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-18 [18]]

In January 1998, an agency of the [/icannwiki.org/DOC Department of Commerce] ([/icannwiki.org/NTIA NTIA]) issued what has become known as the "[/icannwiki.org/Green%20Paper Green Paper]." The document was a proposal which made clear that the agency intended to empower a non-profit entity to take control of the Internet and its [/icannwiki.org/DNS DNS] system.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-19 [19]] The proposal drew criticism from some American lawmakers and other concerned individuals who saw the American-fostered Internet about to be handed over to a Swiss entity.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-greenwhite-20 [20]] The revised "[/icannwiki.org/White%20Paper White Paper]" addressed some of those concerns but still posited the need for an Internet organization which could respect and foster stability, competition, bottom-up coordination, and international representation, while also establishing appropriate protocol and administrative mechanisms.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-21 [21]] The "[/icannwiki.org/White%20Paper White Paper]" did not clarify all of the divisive issues but instead called for the proposed entity to utilize its self-governance to decide on the issues at hand itself.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-greenwhite-20 [20]] The White Paper spurned the creation of the [/icannwiki.org/International%20Forum%20on%20the%20White%20Paper International Forum on the White Paper], which involved the creation and meeting of four globally regional forums, and brought together some 1,000 Internet stakeholders. The IFWP did not create any specific proposal in response to NTIA's White Paper, but it did create a valuable body of thought and laid the foundations for future Internet governance and multi-stakeholder conferences and organizations.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-22 [22]]

The Memorandum of Understanding[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D12 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D12 edit source]][edit | edit source]

On November 25th, 1998, The U.S. [/icannwiki.org/DOC Department of Commerce] and ICANN entered into a Memorandum of Understanding ([/icannwiki.org/MoU MoU]),[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-icann-mou-1 [1]] which officially recognized ICANN as the entity that would:

  1. Establish policy for and direct the allocation of IP number blocks;
  2. Oversee the operation of the authoritative root server system;
  3. Oversee the policy for determining the circumstances under which new [/icannwiki.org/TLD TLDs] would be added to the root system;
  4. Coordinate the assignment of other Internet technical parameters as needed to maintain universal connectivity on the Internet; and
  5. Oversee other activities necessary to coordinate the specified [/icannwiki.org/DNS DNS] management functions, as agreed by the Department of Commerce and ICANN.

Once again, these responsibilities would be undertaken and guided by the principles of stability, competition, private bottom-up coordination, and representation.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-icann-mou-1 [1]] The agreement established ICANN as an entity that would encourage transparency in its dealings and would create ample room for appeals for any binding decisions it would make. The Department of Commerce later noted that it was comfortable ceding its control to ICANN, as it seemed like the best step towards true privatization while still binding the authority of the institution to the American policies found within the [/icannwiki.org/MoU MoU].[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-congress-23 [23]] The original agreement was set with an expiration of September 30th, 2000.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-icann-mou-1 [1]] The [/icannwiki.org/MoU MoU] has been amended several times.

The First Three Supporting Organizations[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D13 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D13 edit source]][edit | edit source]

The three original supporting organizations include: [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-caslon-24 [24]]

  • [/icannwiki.org/DNSO Domain Names Supporting Organization] (DNSO) provides policy advice to the [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board ICANN Board] on issues related to the [/icannwiki.org/DNS Domain Name System] (DNS) and IP addresses. The ICANN Board established the Bylaw provisions for the basic structure of the DNSO on March 31, 1999.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-25 [25]] The DNSO was composed of the Names Council, General Assembly and Constituencies including ccTLD registries, gTLD registries, commercial and business entities, [/icannwiki.org/ISP ISPs] and connectivity providers, registrars and intellectual property.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-26 [26]] On July 9, 2003 the DNSO was restructured and its responsibilities were transferred to the [/icannwiki.org/GNSO Generic Names Supporting Organization] (GNSO).[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-27 [27]] The organization ceased operation after the ICANN Board adopted Article XX: Transition Article of the New Bylaws on December 15, 2002.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-28 [28]]
  • [/icannwiki.org/ASO Address Supporting Organization] (ASO) is responsible for providing advice to the [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board ICANN Board] on issues related to the operation, assignment and management of Internet addresses. It is composed of an Address Council and representatives from the [/icannwiki.org/RIR Regional Internet Registries] (RIRs), including the [/icannwiki.org/APNIC Asia Pacific Network Information Centre] (APNIC), [/icannwiki.org/ARIN American Registry for Internet Numbers] (ARIN) and [/icannwiki.org/RIPE Reseaux IP Europeens] (RIPE).[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-bylawsamended-29 [29]][/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-caslon-24 [24]]
  • [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DPSO%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 Protocol Supporting Organization] (PSO) advised the ICANN Board on issues related to the assignment of parameters for Internet protocols through the PSO Council, which was composed of the [/icannwiki.org/IETF Internet Engineering Task Force] (IETF), [/icannwiki.org/W3C World Wide Web Consortium] (W3C), the [/icannwiki.org/ITU International Telecommunications Union] (ITU) and the [/icannwiki.org/ETSI European Telecommunications Standards Institute] (ETSI).[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-bylawsamended-29 [29]]

Initial Issues[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D14 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D14 edit source]][edit | edit source]

ICANN was immediately faced with two pressing, opposing issues: the task of reigning in [/icannwiki.org/Cybersquatting cybersquatting] by creating policies necessary to protect recognized trademarks, and conversely the need to expand the number of entities accredited to function as [/icannwiki.org/Registrar registrars]. Following the release of the [/icannwiki.org/White%20Paper White Paper], [/icannwiki.org/WIPO WIPO] began its own research into how to protect trademarks and intellectual property within the changing [/icannwiki.org/DNS DNS]. A congressional hearing some 7 months after the empowerment of ICANN recognized the steps that the new entity had already taken to protect intellectual property, recognized the headway WIPO had made in creating further proposals, and called on intellectual property owners to become involved in ICANN.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-congress-23 [23]]

WIPO's report, submitted to ICANN at their 1999 meeting in Berlin, supported the [/icannwiki.org/Whois Whois] system, but also recommended that, should the [/icannwiki.org/Whois Whois] system fail to provide adequate contact information for the trademark holder to contact the domain name holder, the [/icannwiki.org/Registrar registrar] should be obliged to rectify the situation by canceling the domain name holder's rights to the name. ICANN immediately took steps to develop the nascent [/icannwiki.org/Whois Whois] system.

The report also made recommendations regarding the process of accrediting new registrars, called for the creation of a concrete dispute resolution process for intellectual property issues within the [/icannwiki.org/DNS DNS], and also recommended that the creation of any new [/icannwiki.org/GTLD gTLDs] should proceed slowly and with caution. These recommendations precipitated ICANN's [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DAccreditation%20Guidelines%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 Accreditation Guidelines], the creation of the [/icannwiki.org/UDRP UDRP], and the continued debate over how and when to increase the number of [/icannwiki.org/GTLD gTLDs].[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-congress-23 [23]]

Registrar Accreditation[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D15 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D15 edit source]][edit | edit source]

A month before the [/icannwiki.org/MoU MoU] officially recognized ICANN, the [/icannwiki.org/DOC Department of Commerce] and [/icannwiki.org/NSI NSI] amended their cooperative agreement. The agreement had previously maintained the [/icannwiki.org/NSI NSI] as the only registrar for the [/icannwiki.org/.com .com], [/icannwiki.org/.org .org], and [/icannwiki.org/.net .net] domains.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-accreditation-30 [30]] The three amendments to the agreement removed the exclusive rights of NSI; amendment 11 called for the creation of a [/icannwiki.org/SRS Shared Registry System], whereby an unlimited number of competitive registrars would have access to one system managed by NSI.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-31 [31]] Amendment 12 gave more time to NSI to complete important milestones in the liberalization of registry services; the final phase, which called for equal access to the [/icannwiki.org/SRS SRS] by all accredited [/icannwiki.org/Registrar registrars], was now given a deadline of about one year, October 25th, 1999.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-amend12-32 [32]] Amendment 13 attached a $9 fee for each [/icannwiki.org/SLD second level domain] name registered, payable as $18 for new registrations and $9 per year on the anniversary of the original registration.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-33 [33]]

On February 8th, 1999, ICANN posted its Draft Guidelines for [/icannwiki.org/Registrar Registrar] Accreditation for public commentary.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-accreditation-30 [30]] The guidelines were formed through consultation with the [/icannwiki.org/DOC DOC] and [/icannwiki.org/NSI NSI], and further tailored after the session of public commentary.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-34 [34]] Some issues raised during the period of public commentary include: concerns regarding the inherent bureaucracy, inadequate protections for intellectual property, and the reasoning behind accrediting registrars before the [/icannwiki.org/DNSO DNSO] was constituted.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-35 [35]] The ICANN board accepted the revised [/icannwiki.org/Registrar%20Accreditation%20Agreement Statement of Registrar Accreditation Policy] at their March, 1999 meeting in Singapore.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-accreditation-30 [30]]

The initial policy called for [/icannwiki.org/Registrar registrars] to provide secure access to the [/icannwiki.org/Registry registry], be operationally capable of handling significant registration volume, maintain electronic transaction records, handle and provide prompt service to [/icannwiki.org/SLD SLD] requests, provide security, handle seamless transfers of customers who desire to switch registrars, employ an adequately sized staff, and have measures in place to protect the interests of their customers should the registrar fail. The registrar would also have to demonstrate that it had a sufficient liability insurance policy and store of liquid assets. A concern over creating and maintaining a valid registry service is evidenced in the requirement that information regarding each registrant of a [/icannwiki.org/SLD SLD] would have to be submitted by the registrar to [/icannwiki.org/NSI NSI] for inclusion in its registry. Providing a searchable [/icannwiki.org/Whois Whois] service was also required. Application fees for those applying to be included in the Phase 1 testbed cost $2,500, the general application fee was $1,000. Annual accreditation fees, amounting to $5,000, would also be assessed.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-36 [36]]

The [/icannwiki.org/Registration%20Accreditation%20Agreement Registration Accreditation Agreement] was unanimously amended by the ICANN board in May, 2009.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-accreditation-30 [30]]

The Testbed Period[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D16 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D16 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Numerous technical problems plagued the testbed period of the [/icannwiki.org/SRS SRS].[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-andrewmclaughlin-37 [37]] The aforementioned Amendment 12 established the testbed period as Phase 1 of the deployment of the SRS, and set a start date of April 26th, 1999, and an end date of June 25th, 1999.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-amend12-32 [32]] [/icannwiki.org/Register.com Register.com] finally became the first of the 5 competitive [/icannwiki.org/Testbed%20Registrars testbed registrars] to successfully implement its interface with the SRS, which happened 6 weeks into the 2 month testbed period. The technical difficulties also extended to the deployment of the required [/icannwiki.org/Whois Whois] system.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-andrewmclaughlin-37 [37]] Throughout the testbed period general applications for the later phases were being accepted.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-accreditation-30 [30]] The [/icannwiki.org/DOC Department of Commerce] and the [/icannwiki.org/NSI NSI] extended the testbed period about 4 times,[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-38 [38]] the final extension finally expired on November 5th, 1999.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-39 [39]]

UDRP[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D17 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D17 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/UDRP UDRP]

On September 29th, 1999, ICANN posted the [/icannwiki.org/UDRP Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy] for public comments. The process aimed to address problems arising from [/icannwiki.org/Cybersquatting cybersquatting] and protect intellectual property rights. This process was not solely a concern or product of ICANN, given [/icannwiki.org/WIPO WIPO]'s earlier, and continued, effort on the [/icannwiki.org/UDRP UDRP]. The policy asserts that it will transfer, delete, or asses other changes to any domain name held by a [/icannwiki.org/Domainer domainer] which:

  1. Is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and
  2. The domainer no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
  3. The domain name in question has been registered and is being used in bad faith.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-40 [40]]

The same day, ICANN also issued the Rules for the UDRP, which set forth the procedure for filing and responding to complaints. This was also open for a period of public commentary.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-41 [41]] Some of the public comments can be found here.

ICANN adopted the [/icannwiki.org/UDRP UDRP] at its November, 1999, meeting in Los Angeles.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-42 [42]]

History: ICANN 2.0[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D18 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D18 edit source]][edit | edit source]

ICANN's bottom-up focus and its periodic structural reviews lead to revision of its [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Bylaws bylaws] and the introduction of new entities and policies. One such rush of changes happened in and around the year 2000, when the prospective changes and the discussions surrounding them spurned people to talk of "ICANN 2.0".[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-43 [43]]

The Introduction of the ALAC[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D19 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D19 edit source]][edit | edit source]

One of the discussions and propositions which was involved in the debate surrounding "ICANN 2.0" was the introduction of a body which could represent individual Internet users.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-caslon-24 [24]] This became known as the At-Large Committee, or [/icannwiki.org/ALAC ALAC], and while it was finally introduced through amendments to the bylaws in 2002, it had been a hot topic for debate for years.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-44 [44]]

Other Committees[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D20 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D20 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Many of the other new developments at ICANN were accomplished through the introduction of review teams; such as the Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform. Other Committees intent on expanding and specializing the role of ICANN were also created, such as the Security Committee, which eventually became the [/icannwiki.org/SSAC Security and Stability Advisory Committee]. Both of these committees were given official recognition in 2002.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-accra-45 [45]] The push for reform was also significantly aided by [/icannwiki.org/Stuart%20Lynn Stuart Lynn]'s "President's report: The Case for Reform,"[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-46 [46]] which they credited for starting the dialogue on reform and leading to the creation of the more formal committee.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-bucharest-47 [47]]

ICANN adopted a new set of by-laws, which were first laid out by the aforementioned Evolution and Reform Committee, before being revised in response to Public Forums. Those by-laws can be read here. The by-laws not only more clearly defined ICANN's mission and core values, but it also put in place and improved apparatuses for review and greater transparency. The [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DReconsideration%20Committee%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 Reconsideration Committee], [/icannwiki.org/IRP Independent Review Panel], and the [/icannwiki.org/Ombudsman Ombudsman] all were strengthened as a part of this move towards a more transparent organization that is able to defend its actions and decisions.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-48 [48]]

Further Developments[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D21 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D21 edit source]][edit | edit source]

  • [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DIDN%20Committee%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 IDN Committee] is established, 2001.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-49 [49]]
  • The approval of [/icannwiki.org/LACNIC LACNIC] as a [/icannwiki.org/RIR RIR], 2002.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-50 [50]]
  • Approval of [/icannwiki.org/RegistryPro RegistryPro]'s [/icannwiki.org/.pro .pro] [/icannwiki.org/TLD TLD], 2002.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-accra-45 [45]]
  • Creation of [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DExecutive%20Search%20Committee%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 Executive Search Committee], 2002.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-bucharest-47 [47]]
  • New [/icannwiki.org/TLD TLD] evaluation process began, 2002.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-51 [51]]
  • The [/icannwiki.org/Board%20Governance%20Committee Board Governance Committee] was created, 2003.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-52 [52]]
  • The [/icannwiki.org/CcNSO ccNSO] was officially created, 2004.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-53 [53]]
  • [/icannwiki.org/AfriNIC AfriNIC] provisionally recognized as a [/icannwiki.org/RIR RIR], 2004; officially recognized, 2005.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-54 [54]]

gTLD Expansion[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D22 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D22 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/GTLD gTLD]

The discussion of creating new [/icannwiki.org/GTLD Generic Top-Level Domains] has been around since the inception of ICANN; there was no set number fixed, and the fact that the [/icannwiki.org/.com .com] extension has long been the most widely used and recognizable top-level domain was encouraged by ICANN's slow policy development process. It was underwritten in the 2001 amendments to their [/icannwiki.org/MoU MoU] with the U.S. [/icannwiki.org/DOC Department of Commerce] that ICANN was to "collaborate on the design, development and testing of a plan for creating a process that will consider the possible expansion of the number of gTLDs".[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-55 [55]]

In 2000, a number of Working Groups that had been created the year before submitted reports on their take on the introduction of new TLDs; most notably, Working Group C called for a limited number of extensions to be introduced. The Board continued to move ahead with new TLD introduction, creating this application process. The task force that worked with the process helped [/icannwiki.org/.aero .aero], [/icannwiki.org/.biz .biz], [/icannwiki.org/.coop .coop], [/icannwiki.org/.info .info], [/icannwiki.org/.museum .museum], [/icannwiki.org/.name .name], and [/icannwiki.org/.pro .pro] all become recognized extensions in 2000.

At the October, 2003 meeting in Carthage, [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board the Board] passed its most significant resolution to date on fully opening the gTLD creation process. In it they recognized their obligation to develop new gTLDs in an effective, transparent, and stable manner, the overdue nature of a formal process for gTLD expansion, and the problems they faced when introducing the last round of extensions in 2000. Thus, they resolved to begin to dedicate significant resources to the issue and to establish a public forum in order to receive community input.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-56 [56]]

In 2003, important new [/icannwiki.org/STLD sTLDs] began being proposed. While these domains are different from [/icannwiki.org/GTLD gTLDs] in that they are sponsored by a given constituency, this can be seen as another way in which the wider community was pressing for a greater variety of domain space. Applications came from [/icannwiki.org/.asia .asia], [/icannwiki.org/.xxx .xxx], [/icannwiki.org/.net .net], [/icannwiki.org/.cat .cat], [/icannwiki.org/.mobi .mobi], [/icannwiki.org/.jobs .jobs], and [/icannwiki.org/.travel .travel].[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-57 [57]]; they all went on to approval in 2005-2006, except for the controversial [/icannwiki.org/.xxx .xxx],[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-58 [58]] which went through a much more contentious and drawn out process but was still approved in March, 2011 at [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%2040 ICANN 40].[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-59 [59]]

Further Developments[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D23 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D23 edit source]][edit | edit source]

New gTLD Program[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D24 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D24 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/New%20gTLD%20Program New gTLD Program]

After the results of the 2000 and 2003 expansions of new gTLDs, a [/icannwiki.org/PDP Policy Development Process] in connection with the introduction of new gTLDs was developed by the [/icannwiki.org/Generic%20Names%20Supporting%20Organization Generic Names Supporting Organization] (GNSO), which lasted from 2005 until 2007. During this Policy Development Process, the GNSO conducted extensive and detailed consultations with all constituencies within the ICANN global internet community. In 2008, 19 Specific Policy Recommendations were adopted by the ICANN Board for the implementation of new gTLDs, which describe the specifics of allocation and the contractual conditions. ICANN involved the global internet community in an open, inclusive and transparent implementation process to comment, review and provide their input toward creating the Applicant Guidebook for New gTLDs. The protection of intellectual property, community interests, consumer protection, and DNS stability were addressed during the process. Different versions and multiple drafts of the Applicant Guidebook were released in 2008. By June 2011, the ICANN Board launched the New gTLD Program, at the same time approving the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-60 [60]] The Board announced the possibility of a 9th version of the Guidebook in January 2012, but the industry speculated that there was little chance that the changes would be more than clarification, as opposed to new rules and policies.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-61 [61]]

In November, 2012, ICANN, [/icannwiki.org/Verisign Verisign], and [/icannwiki.org/NTIA NTIA], all confirmed that they were prepared with enough resources to begin launching 100 new gTLDs per week.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-62 [62]]

Physical Expansion[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D25 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D25 edit source]][edit | edit source]

In September, 2011, the [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%20Board ICANN Board] approved resolutions to secure new office space for the organization. It is possible they will negotiate for more space at their current location, or that they find a new space at their headquarters of Marina Del Rey. It was also decided to begin permanently leasing its office space in Brussels instead of continuing to rent their space month-to-month. Much of its expansion is related to the new [/icannwiki.org/GTLD gTLD] program. At the time of the board's decision, ICANN staff numbered 124, with 21 open positions to be filled. The 2012 budget includes $2.1 million for office space acquisition and maintenance for its offices in Marina Del Rey, Brussels, Sydney, Paolo Alto, and Washington D.C..[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-63 [63]] The Sydney office went on to be closed in 2012.

In February 2013, CEO Fadi Chehadé announced that ICANN's office in L.A. would diminish in importance while two new "hubs" would be created to fill the gap and provide new means of outreach to ICANN's international constituents. The hubs are to be located in Singapore and Istanbul, and are to act with far more authority and purpose than a stand-alone office; it is clear that many senior staff from the L.A. office will be asked to move, and the CEO himself said he will be based in Singapore once that office is up and running.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-64 [64]][/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-65 [65]] The news was announced during Mr. Chehadé's first comprehensive tour of Asia, with trips to South Korea, China, Japan, and Singapore. He noted that ICANN needed to apologize to Asia, as it had long not been given the attention it deserved within the organization.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-66 [66]]

Conflicts of Interest[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D26 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D26 edit source]][edit | edit source]

ICANN has never had a clear conflicts on interest policy, or any regulations in place that would prevent its most important staff members and its directors from moving directly into employment within the industry. This is an issue given the fact that these people of power influence the decisions and market-power of ICANN, and thus they could help create programs and policies that they could then go on to financially benefit from. This notably came to a head in 2011, when a prominent staffer and the Chairman of the Board left ICANN for employment in the industry. Both were involved in developing ICANN's new [/icannwiki.org/GTLD gTLD] program, and both went on the be employed in new gTLD related ventures.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-revolvingdoor-67 [67]]

The Chairman of the board in question was [/icannwiki.org/Peter%20Dengate%20Thrush Peter Dengate Thrush], who led the directors to the historic approval of a new gTLD program and timeline at [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%2041 ICANN 41] in Singapore. This was his final meeting as Chairman of the board due to the determined term limits. Mr. Thrush went on, weeks later, to become the Executive Chairman of [/icannwiki.org/Top%20Level%20Domain%20Holdings Top Level Domain Holdings], the parent company of new gTLD registry and consultancy, [/icannwiki.org/Minds%20%2B%20Machines Minds + Machines]. He was the first chair to move directly into a high-paying, domain name industry job.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-68 [68]]

Following Mr. Thrush's move to Minds + Machines, a number of outside organizations and ICANN stakeholders called for a concrete ethics policy to be set in place, these include: U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, the [/icannwiki.org/Association%20of%20National%20Advertisers Association of National Advertisers], The [/icannwiki.org/European%20Commission European Commission], The U.S. [/icannwiki.org/Department%20of%20Commerce Department of Commerce], the French government, and other IP and industry organizations.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-69 [69]] ICANN's CEO, [/icannwiki.org/Rod%20Beckstrom Rod Beckstrom] had previously noted at the opening ceremony to ICANN 42, even before Peter Dengate Thrush moved on, that he was encouraged by the fact that the ICANN community was moving to fix the lack of clear ethics rules within the organization. [/icannwiki.org/AusRegistry AusRegistry]'s CEO, [/icannwiki.org/Adrian%20Kinderis Adrian Kinderis], later noted the converse fact that without clear ethics policies he and his industry would continue to go after ICANN's most knowledgeable and prepared individuals for their own gain.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-revolvingdoor-67 [67]]

Following these developments, ICANN announced it would hire outside ethics experts to review its policies and make recommendations. The decision was made during a September, 2011 meeting of the board governance committee.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-70 [70]]

A new Conflict of Interest Policy was released on December 8th, 2011, effective immediately. The policy requires that all Board Members, as well as those in various other postions, disclose any and all potential conflicts of interest to the [/icannwiki.org/Board%20Governance%20Committee Board Governance Committee]. They must then abstain from any ICANN activities related to the conflict of interest,[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-71 [71]] Board members also may not join business with a new gTLD registry until 12 months after the registry's application has been voted on.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-dotnxt-8 [8]]

Time Zone Database[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D27 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D27 edit source]][edit | edit source]

On October 14th, 2011, ICANN announced that it would take over the management of the [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DInternet%20Time%20Zone%20Database%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 Internet Time Zone Database], which contains the code and data that computer programs and operating systems rely on to determine a given location's correct time. It agreed to pick up this new responsibility after a request from [/icannwiki.org/IETF IETF]. Prior to this, the Time Zone Database was managed by a group of volunteers, namely its coordinator, [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DArthur%20David%20Olson%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 Arthur David Olson] at the US National Institutes of Health.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-72 [72]]

Manwin Anti-Trust Lawsuit[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D28 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D28 edit source]][edit | edit source]

[/icannwiki.org/Manwin Manwin], one of the most prominent adult content producers on the Internet, filed an Anti-Trust suit against both [/icannwiki.org/ICM%20Registry ICM Registry] and ICANN over the creation and implementation of the [/icannwiki.org/.xxx .xxx] [/icannwiki.org/STLD sTLD]. This legal action took place in November, 2011, well after the TLD's approval and just before its general availability.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-73 [73]] It also filed an [/icannwiki.org/IRP Independent Review Panel] (IRP) Request with ICANN, making it only the second company ever to do so (the first being ICM Registry itself). Manwin felt that ICANN did not "adequately address issues including competition, consumer protection, malicious abuse and rights protection prior to approving the .xxx TLD."[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-74 [74]]

In January, 2012, ICANN and ICM both filed motions to dismiss the case. ICANN argued that since it is a not-for-profit organization and it is not engaged in "trade or commerce," the US anti-trust laws are not applicable; additionally, both ICM and ICANN argued that Manwin's filing was essentially complaining about the possible increase in competition. ICM cited that Manwin had approached the company earlier with a supposed mutually-beneficial agreement, in which Manwin would acquire various premium .xxx domains for free, in exchange for sharing the profits of these domains with ICM. When ICM turned down the agreement, Manwin Managing Partner Fabian Thylmann said that he would do whatever he could to stop .xxx.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-75 [75]] ICANN's and ICM's motions to dismiss can be found here and here respectively.

In mid-February, Manwin, ICANN and ICM Registry announced that they were in talks and hoping to resolve some or all of the outstanding complaints. The motions to dismiss the case filed by ICANN and ICM were temporarily put on hold.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-76 [76]] On February 17, the company amended its anti-trust lawsuit against ICANN and ICM Registy. According to Manwin's counsel Kevin E. Gaut, two related state law claims were dropped to avoid potential risks of trial delays.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-77 [77]]

In August 2012, a mixed ruling by the Central District of California District Court accepted only 2 out of ICANN and ICM's 7 motions to dismiss. The court ruled that ICANN would be subject to anti-trust law, as ICM pays fees to them in order to be permitted to run the .xxx domain space, and that the trial would proceed with focus on the "defensive registrations" market.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-78 [78]]

Employ Media Arbitration[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D29 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D29 edit source]][edit | edit source]

[/icannwiki.org/Employ%20Media Employ Media] requested an arbitration proceeding to resolve the notice of breach on the [/icannwiki.org/.jobs .jobs] registry agreement issued by ICANN on February 27, 2011 in connection with the universe.jobs website. The jobs board website was launched by Employ Media in partnership with the Direct Employers Association, which the registry operator allowed to register more than 40 thousand .jobs domain names used on the jobs board to advertise job opportunities for more than 5,000 leading companies in the United States. ICANN claimed that that universe.jobs appeared to be in competition with other companies offering the same service and Employ Media's actions violated its charter. ICANN directed the .jobs registry operator and the [[SHRM|Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), the sponsoring organization, to resolve the issues mentioned in the notice of breach and to comply with its charter. ICANN threatened to terminate the .jobs registry agreement if the problems were not be resolved. Employ Media argued that the universe.jobs was launched in compliance with the Phase Allocation Program, which was approved by ICANN. Although the registry operator was disappointed with ICANN's actions Employ Media agreed to resolve the issue by invoking the cooperative agreement provisions in the registry agreement. During the cooperative negotiations, Employ Media agreed to stop registering non-company name domain names until May 6, 2011. However, the company abandoned the cooperative agreement proceedings when it learned that ICANN posted the information about their cooperative negotiations regarding the notice of breach. Employ Media also accused ICANN of "bad faith action." ICANN's legal counsel explained that the internet governing body is just performing its duty to maintain accountability and transparency. When ICANN responded to the Employ Media's arbitration request it reiterated its strong position the Employ Media violated its charter and its decision was appropriate. ICANN asked the court to deny the registry operator's request for relief. At present, both parties are still waiting for the the schedule of their arbitration proceedings from the [/icannwiki.org/ICC International Chamber of Commerce] (ICC) [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DInternational%20Court%20of%20Arbitration%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 International Court of Arbitration].[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-79 [79]] [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-80 [80]] [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-81 [81]] [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-82 [82]] [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-83 [83]] [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-84 [84]] [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-85 [85]]

.JOBS Charter Compliance Coalition Criticism[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D30 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D30 edit source]][edit | edit source]

One day before the implementation of the [/icannwiki.org/New%20gTLD%20Program new gTLD program], the [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3D.JOBS%20Charter%20Compliance%20Coalition%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 .JOBS Charter Compliance Coalition], sent a letter to ICANN detailing the internet governing body's failure to evaluate and investigate all comments and information submitted by entities against the request of the [/icannwiki.org/.jobs .jobs] registry operator to change its charter. It pointed out that ICANN failed to acknowledge its mistake and overturn its decision when complaints and evidence were filed for reconsideration that Employ Media violated its charter. The coalition chairman stated that ICANN was inefficient in dealing with the arbitration proceedings to immediately resolve Employ Media's charter violation, and consequently the company continues to exploit the .jobs TLD and expand the universe.jobs website. Furthermore, it said that the internet community is concerned that ICANN's new gTLD program's multiple stakeholder protection mechanisms might end up mismanaged just like the .jobs TLD and ICANN's promises are "empty words." Moreover, Bell requested the ICANN Board to publicly disqualify Employ Media and its partner, the Direct Employers Association ,from the [/icannwiki.org/New%20gTLD%20Program new gTLD expansion program] because the registry operator has a "history of abuse." According to its Chairman, this is the only way for ICANN to regain a measure of regulatory authority.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-86 [86]]

A New Approach to Africa[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D31 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D31 edit source]][edit | edit source]

On August 10, 2012, ICANN, with the support of [/icannwiki.org/AfriNIC AfriNIC], announced an initiative to increase African participation in influence within ICANN. The initiative is the result of a meeting between [/icannwiki.org/Steve%20Crocker Steve Crocker], Chairman of ICANN's Board of Directors, ICANN's CEO-Designate [/icannwiki.org/Fadi%20Chehad%C3%A9 Fadi Chehadé], and Interim CEO [/icannwiki.org/Akram%20Atallah Akram Atallah], with African community members at [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%2044 ICANN 44] in Prague, Czech Republic. Their goal is to develop a framework for ICANN's Africa strategy to be announced at [/icannwiki.org/ICANN%2045 ICANN 45] in Toronto, Canada. A [/icannwiki.org/WG working group] was established, led by [/icannwiki.org/Nii%20Quaynor Nii Quaynor] of Ghana, to contribute to the development of the strategy. The group is also to work with [/icannwiki.org/Tarek%20Kamel Tarek Kamel], Head of Governmental Affairs.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-87 [87]] The initiative has received strong support from African Internet stakeholders, including former Board Member [/icannwiki.org/Katim%20Touray Katim Touray]. In March 2013, CEO [/icannwiki.org/Fadi%20Chehad%C3%A9 Fadi Chehadé], expressed his desire to raise the number of registrars in Africa from 5 to 25, via personal and business relations with the banking and insurance sectors that would allow the African companies to more easily meet some form of tailored ICANN accreditation. His hope is to accomplish this in just a few months, with something implemented around ICANN 47 in Durban, in July, 2013[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-88 [88]]

IANA Functions Stewardship Transition[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D32 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D32 edit source]][edit | edit source]

Main article: [/icannwiki.org/IANA%20Functions%20Stewardship%20Transition IANA Functions Stewardship Transition]

In March 2014, [/icannwiki.org/NTIA NTIA] released a statement saying that they are intent on transitioning their part of the [/icannwiki.org/IANA IANA] functions away from NTIA and to the global stakeholder community. [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-89 [89]] ICANN issued a press release supporting this shift. [/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-90 [90]]

ICANN created a co-ordination group from nominations among 13 community stakeholder groups, totaling 27 individuals, which produced a draft transition document. On December 2nd 2014, ICANN opened the public comment period on the draft transition document produced by the coordination group.[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-91 [91]]

Senate Hearing on New gTLD Program[[/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26veaction%3Dedit%26vesection%3D33 edit] | [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DICANN%26action%3Dedit%26section%3D33 edit source]][edit | edit source]

On December 8, 2012, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation conducted a full committee hearing to evaluate the value and effects of the [/icannwiki.org/New%20gTLD%20Program new gTLD expansion program] as well as ICANN's efforts in resolving the concerns raised by the Internet community. Witnesses present during the committee hearings included:[/icannwiki.org/ICANN#cite%20note-92 [92]]

  • [/icannwiki.org/index.php%3Ftitle%3DAngela%20Williams%26action%3Dedit%26redlink%3D1 Angela Williams], Senior Vice President and General Counsel-YMCA USA
  • [/icannwiki.org/Dan%20Jaffe Dan Jaffe], Executive Vice President, Government Relations, [/icannwiki.org/ANA ANA]-[/icannwiki.org/CRIDO CRIDO]
  • [/icannwiki.org/Esther%20Dyson Esther Dyson], former ICANN chair /Independent Angel Investor
  • [/icannwiki.org/Fiona%20Alexander Fiona Alexander], Associate Administrator, Office of International Affairs, [/icannwiki.org/NTIA NTIA]-[/icannwiki.org/DOC DOC]
  • [/icannwiki.org/Kurt%20Pritz Kurt Pritz], ICANN Senior Vice President

Generic Names Supporting Organization. Develops and recommends to the Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains and other responsibilities set forth in the Bylaws (ICANN Bylaws).

At-Large Advisory Committee. Considers and provides advice on the activities of ICANN related to the interests of individual Internet users (ICANN Bylaws). Not to be confused with the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group.

Country Code Names Supporting Organization. Develops and recommends to the Board global policies relating to country-code top-level domains (ICANN Bylaws).

Security and Stability Advisory Committee. Advises the ICANN community and Board on matters relating to the security and integrity of the Internet's naming and address allocation systems (ICANN Bylaws).

Address Supporting Organization. Advises the Board with respect to policy issues relating to the operation, assignment, and management of Internet addresses (ICANN Bylaws).

Governmental Advisory Committee. Considers and provides advice on the activities of ICANN as they relate to concerns of governments, particularly matters where there may be an interaction between ICANN's policies and various laws and international agreements or where they may affect public policy issues (ICANN Bylaws).

Root Server System Advisory Committee. Advises the ICANN community and Board on matters relating to the operation, administration, security, and integrity of the Internet's Root Server System (ICANN Bylaws).

Deprecated. Domain Name Supporting Organization. Predecessor of the Generic Names Supporting Organization, which advised the Board with respect to policy issues relating to the Domain Name System (ICANN Bylaws).

Retrieved from "https://icannwiki.org/index.php?title=Sandbox&oldid=476385"