In a September 21st letter sent by Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information Lawrence Strickling to U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) disclosed that it is “actively exploring how to best meet this requirement” for “a clear and enforced ethics and conflict of interest policy” in the next version of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) contract.
This Department of Commerce letter was sent in response to a September 14th letter from Senator Wyden to NTIA raising concerns about news reports of a “revolving door” at ICANN.
The letter was received via the Internet Commerce Association (the “ICA”)
You might note that Senator Wyden was the one who basically put the hold on the Protect IP bill that would have authorize private lawsuits that could shut down ads and payments on domains.
In the letter Senator Wyden writes:
“While I support the control of this system by NTIA, I also believe that any IANA employees ought to be made subject to the same ethics rules in place as NTIA employees. With the growth in importance of this authority, it is important to ensure that decisions are made impartially.”
“Senator Wyden’s interest in this issue was reportedly sparked by a September 21st story in the Washington Post headlined “A ‘revolving door’ at nonprofit keeper of domain names”
Secretary Strickling’s letter of response also notes that the NTIA has conducted two Notices of Inquiry regarding the IANA contract in February and June of this year, and has “received 136 comments from a range of domestic and international stakeholders including governments, private sector entities, and individuals who also noted the need for increase transparency and accountability” — all as part of the first comprehensive review of the IANA contract since it was initially awarded to ICANN in 2000.
NTIA recently exercised its option to extend the length of the current IANA contract, from the end of September 2011 to March 2012, to allow for extended consideration of whether the contract should be re-awarded to ICANN, as well as what additional conditions should accompany it.
Here is the letter:
This is kind of like shutting the barn doors after the horses have run out….
David
This time around yes
Is he the only senator who has a clue what’s going on? or maybe he’s the only one who cares? or who doesn’t have indirect ties to it?
When ICANN was created from Thin.Air in 1998, the theory was that a “Corporate Structure” and U.S. Laws would bring the IANA Wild West Show back to the center of the circle.
U.S. Non-Profit Public Benefit structures were alleged to provide the best protections for CyberSpace Netizens in a MeatSpace world.
Replace the term Netizens with American Indians and CyberSpace with Reservations and you see history repeating itself.
How does the U.S. Government explain to an Anerican Indian that he can not graze his horses on land handed down by word of mouth from his ancestors?
How is it that private citizens from Europe come to the U.S. and now “own”
the land the Indian lives on?
Why do so many academics and pundits make money traveling around talking about the Indians they have net and the land they have never seen ?
…and the U.S. government now says, in so many words: “If you are going to
screw the Indians, do it in an ethical way…”
Why do so many academics and pundits make money traveling around talking about the Indians they have net and the land they have never seen ?
====
Why do so many academics and pundits make money traveling around talking about the Indians they have NEVER MET and the land they have never seen ?