by kierenmccarthy on June 24, 2010
The domain name system’s overseeing body, ICANN, will approve the controversial Internet extension dot-xxx, designed for online pornography, at its Board meeting tomorrow.
The pre-announcement came in an extraordinary statement read out at the start of the public forum at ICANN’s meeting in Brussels by the organization’s general counsel, John Jeffrey.
The statement said that the Board accepted the results of an independent review panel that the Board had made the wrong decision back in 2007 when it denied the application.
But then it went further to say it would approve dot-xxx, would enter into contract negotiations, and then refer that contract to the Governmental Advisory Committee to make sure they were happy with its contents, since they had raised concerns in the past.
The news caught the community by surprise, just as it was due to make its views known to the Board, but has so far been warmly welcomed by the community.
[click to continue…]
by kierenmccarthy on March 1, 2010
The ICANN Board has stuck discussion of the dot-xxx Internet extension on the agenda for its public meeting on 12 March – a good but brave move.
As covered last week, ICANN came off pretty badly following an independent review of the Board’s decision to reject dot-xxx back in 2007. A three-judge panel decided that the decision wasn’t justified and that the decision was “not consistent with the application of neutral, objective, and fair documented policy”.
This has lead the company behind dot-xxx, ICM Registry, to call on ICANN to sign the contract it had negotiated over the course of two years (2005-2007) and add dot-xxx to the Internet’s “root”. The Board agenda lists “Consideration of the Independent Review Panel Declaration ICM Registry v. ICANN” as one of its 11 topics for the public Board meeting.
This is a good move, and it’s the right move. But it is also a brave move because the dot-xxx controversy still creates a lot of heat and light in the ICANN community. The Board will effectively be deciding whether it agrees that an earlier incarnation of the Board got things wrong while sitting in exactly the same position, on the same stage, three years earlier. The community will want blood or some kind. And the Board will have to balance how to adequately deal with the criticism, while also appeasing both those who were strongly against dot-xxx (including governments) and those who feel that the Board did a major disservice to the organisation by ruling against dot-xxx.
[click to continue…]
