SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Briefs

Inside Views

Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch.

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Call For Transparency In The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiation

In this post, three US law professors explain a recent call by over 30 legal scholars for the US Trade Representative to increase transparency for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement intellectual property chapter, and their response to Ambassador Kirk’s response that he is “strongly offended” by the suggestion that the negotiation is not adequately transparent already.





Latest Comments
  • David, thank you for the note. It appears there is... »
  • The link to the US proposal seems to be broken, an... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >

    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >


    Heated Debates Over US-Free Internet

    Published on 10 June 2009 @ 10:02 am

    Intellectual Property Watch

    Warnings about a possible split of the single root zone underlying the global internet have been made by internet governance experts outside the United States following a hearing of the US congressional Subcommittee on Communication Technologies and the Internet on the future of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the internet’s technical oversight body. If the US administration extends the joint project agreement it has with ICANN this year, it might well result in “the emergence of alternative naming and numbering systems” and a further push for the “establishment of intergovernmental internet governance bodies,” warned internet governance expert Wolfgang Kleinwaechter.

    Not only is a French project already promoting “Competitive Governance Arrangements for Namespace Services,” but also some future applicants for new generic top-level domains are considering testing their potential zones based on routing via local internet service providers, according to sources.

    ICANN’s departing CEO and President Paul Twomey was questioned hard at the 4 June congressional meeting about ICANN’s effectiveness in fighting fraud in the internet domain name system (DNS) and the high budget surplus of the nonprofit organisation. Twomey has appealed to Congress to send a signal of confidence in private-sector-led DNS management by letting expire the US-ICANN joint project agreement and continuing to exercise its oversight function through the joint agreement on the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) function, which is key to changes in the internet structure.

    ICANN was created in 1998 under an agreement with the US Commerce Department National Telecommunications and Information Administration that ICANN would gradually become fully independent. The next deadline for ending the agreement and setting ICANN free is later this year. Support for expiration of the joint project agreement (JPA) also came from highly respected internet pioneer Vint Cerf and the Internet Society. Answers to the US government notice of inquiry about the transition are not yet completely posted, as some European governments had filed individual comments, according to one government source.

    Separately, there are reports that a new challenge has been brought to the monopoly the US company VeriSign has over the .com domain, by far the dominant internet suffix. The monopoly is arranged through contract with ICANN and the US government.

    NTIA statement to Congress here.

    Comments to NTIA on the domain name system transition here.

    Categories: IP Live, English

     

    Comments

    1. Jim Fleming says:

      Times have changed, one can not easily compare the current Internet to the Wild West days of the early Internet…

      When ICANN was formed, most people obtained their DNS resolutions from servers buried deep inside a small cartel’s data centers. The client and server software was tightly controlled by the cartel. If ISPs deviated from using the cartel’s code they were strong-armed out of business. An ISP’s traffic would be black-holed by members of the cartel.

      The cartel supported themselves via what they called “Internet Governance”. They would obtain large blocks of routable IP address space via some non-profit sham they set up and then sell/lease or transfer the address space to commercial companies for payments under the table. In some cases, the U.S. Government also funded the members of the cartel via grants to their non-profits, universities, etc. ISPs were shaken down for money when they attempted to obtain routable address space, which was tightly tied to the DNS (in-addr.ARPA).

      Many people saw the corruption. Since the Internet was growing and was viewed as “a good thing”, people assumed they could fix the corruption by buying time. ICANN was created to buy time. Many changes have been made to try to clean up some of the corruption. One of the most important changes has been education. The DNS software and protocols were studied by many people and now there are many more sources of “code”. Another change has been the establishment of corporations to help contain the corruption or help to expose it. The cartel has adapted to control those corporations.

      Technologists continue to try to come up with solutions to try to level playing fields and end the corruption. The hope has been that the free markets would adopt the improved technology and that the U.S. Government would try to keep the cartel(s) in check while new technology is tested and deployed.

      Some of the changes are:

      1. Modern DNS software does not use any root servers.

      2. TLDs can be automatically selected based on DLD** voting.
      http://www.icann.org/en/comments-mail/icann-current/msg00342.html

      3. The next generation Internet architecture places an intelligent “Node” at each home/office. The network simply connects the Nodes without getting in the way.

      It will be interesting to see how ICANN delays new TLDs for more changes to happen. The NSF is funding the GENI project to start over. That will take time. Also, the .COM RE-BID will take time. ICANN will likely claim nothing can be added with all of the new changes coming, that they do not control.

      The cartel continues to game mostly the IANA and RIR “tasks”. The domain names have always been used by the cartel as a source of revenue and also as a **distraction** to keep regulators from looking closely at the IP Address Spectrum Allocation corruption.

      **==== DLD Voting from 1999 ====
      10514 INC
      9264 ONLINE
      7288 NET
      6472 USA
      4481 GROUP
      4101 WEB
      3891 TECH
      3077 UK
      2762 DESIGN
      2570 SYSTEMS
      2542 IT
      2415 US
      2378 SOLUTIONS
      2322 LINE
      2209 LAW
      2171 CONSULTING
      2161 INFO
      2033 SERVICES
      2027 WORLD
      1966 SOFTWARE
      1940 INTERNATIONAL
      1932 INTL
      1880 CORP
      1874 CO


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.