Communications

Changes to Internet Will Ensure It Continues as the Dominant Global Communications Network, Core of Digital Economy

Statement of Dr. Mark Cooper

 |  Press Release

Washington, D.C. – The creation of a new governance model for Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions and the reform of Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) announced last week is a major step forward.  From the point of view of substance and process it will help to ensure the success of the Internet as the dominant, global communications network and the core resource system of the digital economy.  CFA calls on the National Telecommunications Information Administration (NTIA) to complete the process in a timely manner.

Substance:

The proposed IANA governance structure meets and exceeds the conditions and principles set out by the NTIA:

  • To ensure the continued success of the Internet by continuing its smooth functioning and scalability.
  • Apply the traditional Internet governance model to all of the IANA functions, including multi-stakeholder processes.
  • Preserve: Openness and transparency, Accountability, Participation
  • Maintain its Independence: Not government-led

The net effect of a successful transition will have broader substantive benefits, however

  • The outcome not only achieves the NTIA condition that Internet governance not be led by government, it also establishes the structural principle and normative condition that governments should not determine Internet architecture.
  • By honing in on the management of the IANA functions, it affirms the broader principle that Internet architecture should be as independent of policy as possible and remain neutral on social policy issues, while supporting the widest possible array of policy alternatives to address social issues.

Process:

The ability of the Internet community through the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) to work out a major institutional reform with ICANN demonstrates and reinforces the legitimacy of the Internet multi-stakeholder governance model at a new level.

  • It sets a precedent and shows a path for creating polycentric modes of governance as the Internet grows in reach and importance, touching an increasingly complex array of institutions at a global level.
  • It creates a model for sharing authority with organizations that have different forms of internal governance, while establishing the overarching authority of the Internet’s multi-stakeholder governance process and the central role of direct participatory oversight by the Internet community in matters that affect the architecture and operation of the Internet.

The fact that the House Communications and Technology Committee has entitled the hearing “privatizing the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority” is both ignorant and ironic.  Privatization is usually used to describe a process by which a public service, like a utility that was owned by the state, is turned over to a private, for profit entity.

The ignorance part stems from the fact that the Internet was never owned by the government in any sense.  Its development was supported by federal grants, like virtually every other revolutionary new technology (e.g. all of the technology in an i-Phone or a computer, fracking in the petroleum industry), but it was initially developed and operated by academic institutions and governed by self-organizing global Internet organizations.  The Internet Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the Internet Society, and the Regional Registries each had a different responsibility in ensuring the smooth functioning of the Internet as a global network; none were arms of any government.  ICANN is a non-profit corporation, which had a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. government.  The memorandum is being terminated, with its responsibilities transferred to the other Internet organization.  There is no sense in which the transformation of the Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) function is a “privatization”.

The ironic part stems from the fact that “privatization” is a process that conservatives usually support, believing that it results in greater efficiency and innovation.  To the extent that there is a hint of “privatization” in the IANA transition, they should be for it.  In fact, as the Consumer Federation of America showed in its comments on the transition, the conditions set down by the National Telecommunications Information Administration (NTIA) for the transition and the proposals put forward by the Internet Organizations not only ensure the continued smooth operation of the Internet, but extend and strengthen its successful governance principles and create a model for future expansion of its success.

View the analysis here.

 

CFA is an association of more than 250 nonprofit consumer groups that was founded in 1968 to advance the consumer interest through research, advocacy, and education.