ICANN’s Role in re(Regulation) of Content
WHAT IT DOES?
ICANN’s primary objective is to ensure the operational stability of the Internet by managing global domain name system, top level domains, operation of root name server and also managing numbering facilities for Internet infrastructure. The ICANN develops policies related to its functions through bottom-up and consensus-based processes. The unique Internet identifiers related tasks were managed by IANA, a non-for profit American corporation till October 2016 and after that an affiliate of ICANN, Public Technical Identifiers (PTI) is performing same tasks through contracts and subcontracts with ICANN.
Official document released by ICANN mentions that
“ICANN does not police the Internet. It does not control Internet content or stop spam. ICANN works to ensure the security, stability and interoperability of the Internet through creating fair policies and through operation of the domain name system.”
GETTING TO ISSUE (VIGNETTE)
In 2011 when ICANN announced opening of application for new gTLDs, the auto maker Chrysler Group LLC has applied to ICANN for .ram. The Indian government raised its objection during the GAC Durban meeting that if approved and, such mark not used cautiously it might hurt the religious susceptibilities of majority class or religious section of the citizens of India (RAM is idolatry figure in India, worshipped and revered). Similar issue occurred in September 2017 involving government of Spain as the .cat registry (intended to serve the needs of the Catalan linguistic and cultural community) was targeted and held responsible for the content of websites hosted on its domains.
THEN WHAT!
WHERE IS FREE SPEECH
These incidents point towards freedom of expression related issues associated with gTLDs and hence to ICANN. This raises concern that protection of free speech online is a political matter since organizations managing online content and expressions have their own interests or align with interest of limited few. Thus free speech in online world is ‘free’ with own limitations which are not visible directly to outside world as negotiations happen at the top level (academic literature by DeNardis and Raymond 2013). The academicians have also analysed this issue from theoretical lenses politics in technological artefact (Winner 1980). Researchers have investigated the famous case of ‘Daily Stormer’ where publications were not supported by a hosting provider, domain name registrars and a DDos mitigation service. It has been analysed critically for the relying on ‘morality’ cause versus rule of law as it indicated how Internet’s private actor driven governance model responds to problems on the web.
HOW IS THIS MANAGEMENT PROBLEM
Thus management of critical Internet infrastructure fundamentally relates to the exercise of power, experience of citizenship or understanding of users. The domain name allocation and online content management are embedded in global social, political and economic systems.
Whether IANA was managing internet infrastructure or now multi-stakeholder PTI is doing same task, it is necessary to investigate it critically and highlight the interests, hence choices made by the decision makers. Given the global nature of Internet further research is required to understand institutional issues and design of Internet governance by studying role of state and non-state actors both.
To read more:
DeNardis, Laura, and Mark Raymond. 2013. “Thinking Clearly About Multistakeholder
Winner, Langdon. 1980. “Do Artifacts Have Politics ?” Daedalus 109 (1): 121–36. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20024652.