
Ask HN: Do you support the United States' disengagement from ICANN? - ibejoeb
On October 1st, certain antitrust exemptions granted to ICANN under the US Department of Commerce will expire.  Subsequently, ICANN will no longer be legally able to administer the root zone while under US jurisdiction, and will seek stewardship under a different government entity willing to provide similar exemptions.<p>Do you support or oppose this change?<p>The formal proposal: https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ianacg.org&#x2F;icg-files&#x2F;documents&#x2F;IANA-transition-proposal-final.pdf
======
AnimalMuppet
Do I trust the US? Sadly, no, I don't, not any more.

Do I trust somebody like the UN? _Absolutely not._ Do I trust a "Global
Multistakeholder Community" to not become the UN? No.

So the US running ICANN seems to me to be likely to end up less badly than
having somebody multinational run it.

------
auganov
The whole rationale behind it is [0] to thwart attempts at creating a U.N.-run
IANA or countries creating their own IANAs. Most seem to believe that
governments or government-influenced entities won't really gain any
significant, disconcerting powers. If so - is it reasonable to believe that in
the long term it will have the desired political result?

I don't feel like I fully understand what's going to happen. So I'd definitely
feel more assured if we went for a probationary period as suggested here
[https://www.lawfareblog.com/icann-and-iana-transition-
procee...](https://www.lawfareblog.com/icann-and-iana-transition-proceed-
caution)

[0] is it?

------
DKnoll
<canuck> Definitely, who wouldn't? </canuck>

