[discuss] Time to be more precise about Internet Governance

David Cake dave at difference.com.au
Tue Jan 7 06:35:58 UTC 2014

My apologies for some replies to old messages. I'm in catchup mode after a few less active days. 

On 3 Jan 2014, at 4:09 am, Demi Getschko <trieste at gmail.com> wrote:

> I tend do agree with Brian on this theme. In some way, ICANN is devoting much of its energy and time to the so called "domain name industry" (btw, I do not see any good reasons for naming it "industry"). And, in my opinion, ICANN would be better viewed (and would have better served the community) if issues like IPv6 had deserved the same amount of effort and attention as the gTLD issue...
	I have to admit that I am somewhat baffled as to how ICANN could do its job without being largely concerned with 'the domain name industry'. Mostly, I think people making this argument are (somewhat unreasonably) conflating the domain name speculation market with the domain name industry itself. If you think of the domain name as consisting largely of registries and registrars, then of course ICANN spends a lot of time being concerned with what they do. The regulation of what registries and registrars do is a large part of what ICANN was set up to do, and so it is entirely unsurprising that it is a large part of what it does. And of course it is an industry. 
	I think ICANN non-participants imagine that the names side of ICANN does nothing but gTLDs. It is far from true. 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140107/3c67d0df/signature.asc>

More information about the discuss mailing list