In this discussion, discuss the primary governance of the internet (via ICAAN)… formerly (and some would say still) a US-centric leadership model, and discuss what a “fair” model for internet oversight looks like.
In your paper, start by considering the following questions:
Do you think it was a mistake for the U.S. to have relinquished its “ownership” of ICANN? Why or why not?
Do you think the current model is fair? Why or why not?
Who are the winners in the current model? Who are the losers and what are they losing?
In considering your discussion post, you may reflect on any of the readings in this module (textbook or web articles) or do your own research… in any case, make sure you cite your references!.
https://youtu.be/G-BIFA4RuCY
CISPA – The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act was introduced by U.S. Representative Michael Rogers (Michigan) with the intent of protecting the United States’ internet interests (both governmental and industrial) against external attacks. It’s technically an amendment to the National Security Act of 1947 with consideration of new issues in the 21st century. Like many attempts to address internet security via national legislation, CISPA has been controversial.
ICANN – The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers is a multistakeholder group and nonprofit organization responsible for coordinating the maintenance and procedures of several databases related to the namespaces and numerical spaces of the Internet, ensuring the network’s stable and secure operation.
IGP – The Internet Governance Project (IGP is an alliance of academics that puts expertise into practical action in the fields of global governance, Internet policy, and information and communication technology. The Project both researches and publishes an analysis of global Internet policy issues. Its website URL is: http://www.internetgovernance.org/ and is sponsored by Syracuse University. (See Milton Mueller below.)
ARIN – The American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) is the regional internet numbering governance body for the North American region. Its website (http://www.arin.net) provides extensive information about its activities.
The Judiciary Committee of the United States Congress was created in 1813 and is charged with overseeing the administration of justice within the federal court system, administrative agencies and Federal law enforcement entities. In recent years, it has been involved in considering legislation (e.g., SOPA, CISPA, etc.) related to intellectual property rights on the internet.
Milton Mueller is a faculty member of Information Studies at Syracuse University (New York) and is an internationally-known spokesperson on issues related to internet governance.
Module 4 Content – Competing Forces
This module is in many ways a continuation of the discussion in Module 3, but with more emphasis on attempting to resolve some of the conflicts already identified. The means presented of possibly resolving some of these issues is through the mechanics of existing government agencies as opposed to simply expanding the dialog. These articles help in understanding how the current internet governance models and structures function to provide a coordinated system for addressing issues of privacy and access on the internet.
ICANN
Overview – ICANN History: In March 2014, the United States government announced it would be transitioning its oversight of ICANN, which runs critical functions that keeps the Internet as we know it working through IP addresses and the domain name system, to a global multistakeholder community. The news created a lot of fear, with some claiming the US was “surrendering control” and that countries like Russia and China could impose undue restrictions. This video discusses that transition and why this change is actually inspiring, and we should be proud about a global, non-governmental community running the Internet. Watch the TED Talk here: https://youtu.be/RDT8G_uLtuc
Internet Governance: Model Diplomacy: https://youtu.be/G-BIFA4RuCY
Please read about ICANN and its history here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICANN
ICANN v. the World (Time Magazine / Techland) – Historical article discussing the governance of ICANN
This Time magazine article from March of 2011 provides a contemporary concrete example of the efforts by the United Nations to wrest additional control from ICANN for fundamental internet domain decisions. It is included in this module as a way of further illustrating how ICANN mechanically functions to address actual issues. In this case, how TLDs (Top Level Domains) are named and issued.
URL: http://techland.time.com/2011/03/05/icann-vs-the-world/
IANA is a function of ICANN. Here is an article to help you understanding the IANA functions: https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2014/10/understanding-the-iana-functions/
Below are a couple articles that illustrate the extent to which internet governance is becoming increasingly relevant to the ongoing activities of the United States Government.
Congressional discussion of ICANN-US relationship:
URL: http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/lynn-testimony-12jun02-en.htm
IGP (Internet Governance Project) is a general “.org” that focuses on the overall internet governance activities. These are some historical articles that might interest you:
URL: http://www.internetgovernance.org/publications/
Maintaining US Leadership on Internet Governance: https://www.cfr.org/report/maintaining-us-leadership-internet-governance
CISPA (Cyberintelligence Sharing and Protection Act)
CISPA is a controversial measure passed in 2015 to encourage businesses and government agencies to share information related to malicious hackers and their methods. A quick guide to the bill: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-quick-guide-to-the-senate-s-newly-passed-cybersecurity-bill/
CISPA Bill (text of bill)
URL: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr3523ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr3523ih.pdf
LA Times Analysis of CISPA (4-9-2012) – CISPA legislation is seen by many as SOPA 2.0
URL: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-cispa-legislation-seen-by-many-as-sopa-20-20120409,0,259413.story
The latter two links are about some legislation in the United States government that, much like SOPA, are attempts to address control of internet content through nation-state (in this case the United States). The LA Times analysis is juxtaposed with the actual congressional bill in these links.
