[At-Large] Ukraine, .RU, and internet governance

[Antony Van Couvering]

Further to what Karl says, ccTLDs are not beholden to ICANN, whether they are government-run or not. Many of them have signed lightweight memoranda of understanding or letters of co-operation that really don’t really restrict their actions in any way. 

So ccTLDs are free to issue their own statements and take their own actions. Even gTLD owners are free to say something. 

But, again, crickets.  

What is it with this industry?  McDonald’s abandoned a 30-year business plan.  BP and Shell Oil have abandoned many billions of dollars.  These are hardly what many of us would consider moral businesses, but apparently they are more sensitive to what internet users want than ICANN is. Because I assure you that everyone who buys a Big Mac or fills up their car with gasoline, is an internet user…. 

Or maybe BP, authors of the Gulf of Mexico; and Shell, who have poisoned half of southern Nigeria; and McDonalds, who have caused more heart attacks and diabetes than any other company on the planet — maybe they are ignoring public opinion and just have a more advanced moral compass than ICANN. 

A shameful comparison in either case. 




> On Mar 13, 2022, at 4:49 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree with your anger and frustration.
> 
> I want to mention another bit of reality that is oft missed in discussions.
> 
> ICANN has created a lot of machinery and procedures.  A lot of people think of that machinery as if it were some sort of mini-government when, in reality it is nothing more than the mutable organization chart of a private corporation.
> 
> There is also a lot of belief that ccTLDs are somehow "sovereign" or owned in some way by the nation each represents.  They are not, particularly as exhibited by active ccTLDs that represent nation-states that no longer exist (.su)
> 
> With regard to the massive ICANN machinery:  Because ICANN intentionally created itself to not have "members" (or shareholders) the responsibility and authority of the corporation is vested entirely into the board of directors.  Although pieces of that authority (but not the responsibility) can be temporarily delegated, that delegation can be changed or removed at the whim of the board of directors at any time.  There is no body of members or shareholders who have authority to stop the board from engaging in any action that is not unlawful.  (There may be some authority in creditors, but usually only in bulk transfers of assets or liquidation proceedings.)
> 
> In other words, what ICANN's board has created ICANN's board can un-create, including all of ICANN subsidiary bodies, its staff, and its executives.
> 
> Along the way ICANN might have to pay out some contractual termination fees to executives or engage in some contractual litigation, but that is 100% within the power of the board of directors.
> 
> So if the ICANN board decides to drop or redelegate .ru then there is no body within ICANN that can stop it. Such an action might trigger litigation in a California court for breach of contract by the current holder of .ru, and probably also a request for an injunction which may or not succeed..
> 
> Once ICANN decides to move forward ICANN can instruct Verisign to make the appropriate modifications to the root zone file. Verisign could refuse which would engender a contract dispute. And if modified that zone file will then pass onto the root server operators who may or may not chose to conform.
> 
> Notice that there is no national or international authority in this chain.
> 
>         --karl--
> 
>