US to relinquish key oversight role for Internet (Update)

Mar 14, 2014 by Rob Lever
A picture taken on March 15, 2013 in Paris shows the screen of a computer connected on the internet and displaying a webpage

The US government announced Friday it was giving up its key role overseeing the Internet's technical operations, handing over those functions to "the global multi-stakeholder community."

The move "marks the final phase of the privatization" of the management of the Internet domain name system, said a statement from the US Commerce Department.

The US agency called for "global stakeholders to develop a proposal" for a transition to a new plan with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a non-profit group that took over some of the functions in 1997 under an agreement with the US government.

The decision comes with Washington under pressure following revelations about vast surveillance programs operated by the secretive National Security Agency to collect intelligence and other data through a variety of methods.

ICANN leaders said during a conference call that the move by the US was a sign that the organization has matured and that it was in the works long before leaked documents showed massive online snooping by intelligence agents.

"Every president, every board of ICANN since its inception has been working toward this day," ICANN president and chief executive Fadi Chehade said during a conference call.

No immediate impact

The end of the US oversight role has no immediate impact for Internet users, and ICANN will continue to administer the network's key technical functions.

The change affects US government oversight of "root zone" of databases underlying the Internet which makes Washington a steward of that system, even though the functions are contracted out to ICANN and the infrastructure company Verisign.

"The timing is right to start the transition process," said Assistant Commerce Secretary Lawrence Strickling, who added that he looked forward to "an appropriate transition plan."

The statement said the US hopes to "support and enhance the multi-stakeholder model," and "maintain the openness of the Internet" under any new system.

ICANN said its role as administrator of the Internet's unique identifier system remains unchanged.

"The Internet's Unique Identifier functions are not apparent to most Internet users, but they play a critical role in maintaining a single, global, unified and interoperable Internet." ICANN said.

Unanswered questions

But the change leaves some questions unanswered on the future stewardship of the Internet.

Daniel Castro of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said the United States "was bullied into making the change" due to pressure over the revelations of leaked NSA documents from former contractor Edward Snowden.

"The Snowden disclosures are merely a pretext," Castro said in a blog post.

"While the NSA revelations have rightly angered many people around the world, they have nothing to do with Internet governance. The US Department of Commerce has not once abused its oversight of ICANN to aid the intelligence community."

Castro said the change opens the door to other governments such as Russia or China modifying the Internet architecture for political reasons.

Without US oversight, "ICANN would not be accountable to anyone, and would be motivated only by the interests of those individuals who control the organization," the analyst added.

Greg Shatan, a US lawyer who is a member of an ICANN working group, said the change is "a big deal," but that Washington is not walking away entirely from its role in the Internet.

The change affects "the plumbing of the Internet" but ICANN still has obligations to the US under its "Affirmation of Commitments," Shatan added in an email.

"By making this announcement, the US is trying to make sure the transition happens on its own terms, and that the US is setting the rules for the transition."

The European Union recently called for these modifications, but some other countries have been seeking deeper changes, such as placing the Internet under UN control—which came up at a heated 2012 gathering of the UN's International Telecommunications Union.

"The US is making sure that the ITU and the UN do not take this oversight function," Shatan said.

"The press release is very clear that the US will not accept any proposal that replaces US government oversight with a government or intergovernmental solution."

Explore further: US senator attacks '.sucks' web address plans (Update)

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

ICANN chief to leave at end of term

Aug 17, 2011

The head of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the global body which manages the technical infrastructure of the Web, has announced he will not seek another term.

Recommended for you

Facebook dressed down over 'real names' policy

Sep 17, 2014

Facebook says it temporarily restored hundreds of deleted profiles of self-described drag queens and others, but declined to change a policy requiring account holders to use their real names rather than drag names such as ...

Yelp to pay US fine for child privacy violation

Sep 17, 2014

Online ratings operator Yelp agreed to pay $450,000 to settle US charges that it illegally collected data on children, in violation of privacy laws, officials said Wednesday.

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Sean_W
5 / 5 (1) Mar 14, 2014
So we go from one nation state with too much power over the Internet to a consensus of nation states with too much power over the Internet? Or is it a non-profit with too much power over the Internet selling out to a consensus of nations with too much power over non-profits?
smartninja
not rated yet Mar 14, 2014
I'd rather have the internet controlled by a consortium of states than a single state. The internet should not be affected by nationalistic interests to the same degree if various states oversee each other.
MrVibrating
not rated yet Mar 15, 2014
It's a very disturbing development, and in the worst case could signal the death knell for the internet as we know it.

Surely control of the internet should only be entrusted to the world's most stable democracy? When that ceases to be the US, i'll support the handover. There's going to be espionage, subversion and subterfuge regardless, but the whole point and working principle of a democracy (and democratic overseer) is that the interests uniting us outweigh any divisions. With ICANN cast adrift at the mercy of international trade winds and global political tempests, will we even know who we're entrusting anymore...?