Carl
Kaplan
I.
BIOGRAPHY
II.
GOVERNANCE
a.
Defining Governance
b. Is
ICANN Governance?
c.
What is the Right Model?
III.
CONSENSUS
a.
Defining Consensus
b. Does
Consensus Limit ICANN’s Authority?
c.
Is Consensus
the Right Standard?
IV.
ICANN
a.
Can ICANN be fixed?
b. ICANN’s Future
V.
THE INTERNET
March
2000
GOVERNANCE:
Defining Governance
Q:
Could you define governance for us?
A:
Governance? In general?
Q:
In general? Then if you think there is a specialized definition
for the internet, what that would be?
A:
I am thinking of political governance where there is an institution
that sets rules of conduct and enforces them.
Q:
Do you have a different definition for the internet?
A:
No but I don’t think there is really an internet governance
system.
Q:
Do you mean that as a descriptive matter – that it doesn’t currently
exist – or do you think that it can’t exist?
A:
Well, I don’t know if it can or it can’t, but there doesn’t
seem to be…I would amend the first one and say that there is
some sort of centralized aspect to governance.
Again I am thinking of institutionalized governance. There doesn’t seem to be anything…Governance
of the internet seems to be kind of ad hoc.
Q:
Do you think that is the appropriate approach?
A:
No, I don’t, but I am not sure.
I don’t have an answer about how things should be, but
I can describe the way things are now. The way things are, it seems to me, is that there is no internet
governance. There’s
laws that courts enforce in odd cases.
There’s some things that the FTC is looking into.
There’s ICANN. It
does some little things on the fringes.
There’s the EU-US data protection, which seems to be
self-regulation. There’s nothing that is really regulating the
internet. There are
a lot of little things. It
is very chaotic.
GOVERNANCE:
Is ICANN Governance?
Q:
So, I guess you just said that you don’t believe ICANN is governance?
A:
No. What are they doing? What are they doing? I think ICANN is kind of an interlude to something
that I don’t quite know what will replace it, but…ICANN is in
an impossible situation basically.
They were formed by the Commerce Department as kind of
non-profit corporation that was going to get in there and do
all this stuff in kind of a quick, no muss-no fuss manner that
the government is not capable of. That’s why they delegated all the stuff to a corporation. Whenever ICANN tries to do something, everybody
howls because they’re doing what the Commerce Department wanted
them to do. People howl
that they are not acting enough like a government.
They are in a no win situation.
Whenever they try to do something, everybody cries about
it. So I don’t really think they can do anything. They are in an impossible
situation. Like I say,
I don’t think they’ll last.
It’s just an interlude to something else is, but I don’t
know what the something else is.
For example, a year or two ago, they wanted to fund –
they had no funding so they put a tax on internet domain names
and Congress basically said what are you doing. So they backed away from that.
Now they have to borrow money or get loans from big corporations
to fund themselves. I
think…I read the other day in Cairo that they accept five thousand
dollar donations from law firms that want to distribute their
flyers on the outside of the meeting. This is not my idea of a government. I don’t know what they are doing.
As
far as the other aspect of ICANN – I know Harvard is working
on it – some sort of representation of the internet at large
through, I think the latest plan is that people would vote for
some sort of intermediary organization which in turn would nominate
people for certain seats on the board.
I am skeptical of that ever working too.
I don’t see how that is going to work.
Q:
In terms of the election process or in terms of what the board
will do?
A:
I just don’t think that the vast majority of people who use
the internet will bother to vote or take part in anything.
It’s just too costless to tune it out.
ICANN:
ICANN’s Future
Q: Who has a stake in ICANN’s perpetuation?
A:
The powers that be – the trademark owners, Hollywood studios,
people that want to protect their trademarks, law firms that
represent those clients, down the road others like copyright
holders. There are a
couple…As I said there are some consumer organizations, like
the Markel Foundation, that are trying to work within the system
to represent the average internet Joe. But again I am skeptical. I don’t see how that process works. The thing about – I used to have a professor
at college who I once asked and this was twenty years ago…At
that time there were just interactive T.V. experiments and I
can remember into him at the end of a political science lecture
and I said, “Soon everyone will be voting by pushing a button
on top of the T.V. Isn’t that a great thing.” He said, “That
would be a terrible thing because citizenship implies more than
just voting. It is taking an active part in the affairs of the
place you live.” That’s the problem with ICANN. You need more than just a way to get some people
to vote. You need some
sort of way for people to take part their own affairs and I
don’t see how ICANN could do that.
Q:
What’s the major obstacle to that? Is it that ICANN needs to
be global and if it’s going to be participatory and global,
it will never be efficient?
Or is it a function of complex interests at home that
aren’t going to allow it to succeed?
A:
I guess, the structure of ICANN.
It is a not for profit corporation.
I believe it is a non-voting, not for profit.
The stockholders or the members of a not for profit don’t
vote. It’s not voting. So you basically have a board
that runs everything. The
board by their own grace and favor will set up a system where
they are elected, but there are no voting members.
I don’t think they’ve changed the incorporation papers
to make it a voting thing. Even if it were a voting, not for profit, that’s
not a government. That’s
not a governing system to me.
A not for profit? I am not sure there’s going to be any
centralized thing, a global institution that runs everything.
I have an open mind.
I don’t know what is going to happen.
But I don’t think ICANN is going to last very long.
Q:
What will bring it down?
A:
At one point, they are going to try to do something that is
a little bit too much. The people who don’t like it wil complain to Congress or the Commerce
Department or in other countries and they’ll just kill it or
take away it’s powers. What
they’ve done is very little and it’s not even on everyone’s
radar screen. Law students are following it and certain reporters but my parents
don’t know about it. What
have they done? They
have an arbitration system for domain names and I think that
is it. Now they want to introduce some top level domains…but that is really
nothing. They would
argue that we’re not supposed to do anything.
Everyone has it wrong.
We’re just a technical [group] that works out the domain
name system. Everybody who is crying…well, we’re really
not. If they do very
little minor things, I think they’ll last.
If they do big things like what you’d expect a government
would do, they won’t last.
CONSENSUS:
Does Consensus Limit ICANN’s Authority?
Q:
It sounds a little bit like you are in agreement with ICANN’s
argument about the way consensus works to check what they can
do – that, as you say, if they do something that really oversteps
what people think is appropriate for them, it will all fall
apart. Is that right?
A:
Well, that happened with the tax.
Possibly. I do think that if they did anything large,
the rug would be pulled out from under them.
But I don’t see them as…when I think of internet governance,
I don’t think about ICANN.
I think about this crazy quilt…what are the rules on
the net? Various court decisions, to me. There’s no real laws at this point. There’s no global organization doing anything.
The World Trade Organization. I think some of the ICANN
stuff and some of the U.S. laws are in harmonization with W.T.O.
laws, but there’s nothing really…there’s nothing. That’s what I keep getting back to. I think what we are seeing is that the early
part of the internet is just very chaotic.
CONSENSUS:
Defining Consensus
Q:
Let’s go back to that consensus idea for a second.
When you hear people in ICANN talking about consensus,
what do you understand them as meaning?
A:
What are they saying? I don’t follow it that closely.
Q:
Well that they take decisions by consensus….
A:
Whose consensus? That kind of bubbles up through these supporting
organizations? Well,
what decisions are you referring to?
Q:
For example, the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy.
A:
Well, I don’t know.
CONSENSUS:
Is Consensus the Right Standard?
Q:
They say we don’t have a voting mechanism.
We do this all by consensus and consensus grows out the
technical origins of all of this, that it’s the way technical
groups have always taken decisions. Do you think that’s an appropriate standard
to be using in questions that look like they are becoming increasingly
political?
A:
I don’t know what they mean by consensus.
Who do they sound out to get a consensus from?
My personal opinion? I don’t like the idea of ICANN.
I don’t like the idea of a not for profit corporation
making decisions, delegated by the Commerce Department to make
decisions about anything involving the internet because I think
they are without accountability.
ICANN:
Can ICANN be Fixed?
Q:
Is there any way to introduce accountability without totally
scrapping ICANN and starting over?
A:
You have this indirect accountability.
When they go too far, grand-standing politicians will
have a hearing, then ICANN will pull back. That’s what happened with the taxes but I wouldn’t
really call that accountability.
It’s indirect. Maybe
the next time they won’t pull back but they’ll be emboldened. Who knows? There’s no accountability.
They don’t represent – I don’t think they can represent
or I am not convinced that they can represent the average internet
user. I think that there
is just naturally a danger that they will sway towards the branches
that lend them money or give them money.
Q:
Would you agree that there is a need for some centralized administrative
authority for assigning domain names and IP addresses?
A:
I guess so. There always has been one. I guess so.
I guess I am an old liberal but I would prefer it to
be run out of the Department of Commerce where there’s more
accountability. But my way was rejected because when they tried
to do that, nothing happened.
There’s was gridlock.
Congress and the government weren’t capable of doing
anything. So they dropped it off on this not for profit. Ideally, I would like to see it more in the
government. I am not
even sure why it is within their powers or interests to have
an arbitration system.
Q:
Do you think keeping this within the U.S. government is appropriate
given the international character of the internet?
A:
You mean domain names?
GOVERNANCE:
What is the Right Model?
Q:
Yes. Or would a treaty organization be a better model?
A:
Probably a treaty organization.
I just don’t like the idea of a private non-profit setting
rules governing, without political accountability and without
the involvement of the average internet user. Probably the better way to go would be a political
system, like part of the Commerce Department or part of the
United Nations. But
that is not practical, that is not going to happen.
Ideally, that should happen.
My call – and we’ll see if I am right in five years –
is that I don’t think ICANN will be around very long.
Q:
Do you think it is problematic that, given what ICANN has the
authority to do, that so many people seem to know nothing about
this debate?
A:
You mean the average person?
Q:
Yes, the average internet user. Someone who would say in response
to hearing the term ICANN, ‘you can what…?’
A:
They’re not sure about a lot of things. There
are also a lot of things about government people don’t follow.
But it’s new. [tape
corrupted] It’s a my
eyes glaze over story. The
average person can’t really follow it.
It’s just too new and too arcane.
But that doesn’t really mean anything.
THE
INTERNET
Q:
What do you think the internet’s greatest promise is?
A:
I think the global nature of the internet.
It’s something that I am always reminded about as a journalist.
When I write a story and I get emails from readers, frequently
some of my email comes from people in Australia, Germany or
India. It’s just unbelievable. I used to work for a newspaper and I never
got letters from readers – anywhere.
Forget about foreign letters.
So I am always reminded that this is really global. Sometimes because I write about legal issues, so I hear from lawyers
in Germany saying you should write about this story here. It’s just my personal feeling – and this is
a cliche – it really is a global thing.
My personal feedback is global.
I write emails to these people who write me. I think that is its biggest promise. Somehow it will bring people together in ways that haven’t happened
before. Governments
have had these types of connections but people never have. That’s
really important. That’s really unbelievable.
Q:
Do you think there is anything ICANN can do today that would
damage that?
A:
Sure. They could put a chokehold on things. They are in a position to indirectly enforce
their policy by saying if you want a domain name or a license,
you have to meet X, Y, and Z conditions and one of the conditions
might be you have to follow ICANN’s rules.
I don’t think they will do that but they could do that.
[tape
corrupted]