Re: New York Times article on ccTLDs/IATLD

["John B. Reynolds" <john@reynolds.nu>]

>From my perspective, the key paragraph in the NYT article is the one where
Mike Roberts refers to "back-channel pressure" as the cause of the
"sovereign control" statement.  This tends to confirm my suspicion that
major foreign governments have indicated that they will repudiate ICANN and
thereby derail the privatization process if they are not given unambiguous
authority over 'their' national TLDs.  If this is the case, governmental
control over ccTLDs is a fait accompli.  Further debate over past practice
or governments' authority to regulate "semantic constructs" is certain to
come to nought.

I agree that this situation is cause for concern about the stability of
ccTLDs, particularaly those that function as virtual gTLDs.  (A glance at my
domain name will tell you why I have a particular interest in this issue.)
Governments whose TLDs are used primarily by entities outside their
countries may be tempted to try to maximize revenue without regard to the
rights of domain holders.  The only effective defense against such measures
is to remind national governments that policies that disrupt ccTLDs would
'kill the golden goose' by causing current and prospective ccTLD domain
holders to flee to TLDs whose stability is not in question.