Whose Internet is it, anyway?

When you're in charge, people on both sides of an argument call you extremist - an aspect of power that the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers knows all to well.

ICANN, the private, non-profit organization formed in November 1998, is responsible for managing domain names, IP address space, protocol parameters and the root server system. Since its inception, Internet watchdog groups have been suspicious of ICANN, believing it to be a threat to the vision of the Web as an unregulated, open medium.

On the other end, ICANN has been feeling pressure from the business and copyright communities, which want the group to provide safeguards against cyber-squatters. Cyber-squatters arespeculators who register well-known trademarks in hopes of reselling them to top bidders, usually the trademark owner.

During its meeting last week in Yokohama, Japan, ICANN discussed a topic that will turn up the heat even more: the addition of new top level domains (TLDs) to the current crop that includes dot-com, dot-org and dot-net.

In a meeting topic outline, ICANN listed three reasons for adding new TLDs: enhancing competition for registration services, enhancing the utility of the domain name system and increasing the number of available domain names.

Competition in the domain registration field is a relatively new phenomenon. Network Solutions Inc. served as the only registrar for the dot-com, dot-net and dot-org names - referred to as general-use TLDs - from 1993 until June 1999, causing some watchdog groups to fear that too much power was in the hands of too few.

The number of accredited TLD registrars has grown to 57 in just over a year. NSI still operates the registry, which is the authoritative database that maps names within the TLD to IP addresses, for all three TLDs. Adding new general-use TLDs would create a place for a new registry, encouraging competition and presenting the possibility of more international and widespread management of the Internet.

If new TLDs are added, "a reasonable person would assume we wouldn't be the registry," said an NSI spokesman. NSI has recommended that a new registrar be located in Europe, he said, a move that would allay the fears of groups that see ICANN as a potential governing body over the entire medium.

The need for new domain names - not fear of a concentration of power - seems to be the greatest motivator for adding new TLDs. Dot-com is the most registered general-use TLD. Only 108 of a possible 1098 domain names have been registered under the dot-com TLD. Nevertheless, some industry observers say the store of "good names" in all the general-use TLDs is on the verge of being exhausted, spurring the need for more.

However, some of these observers said the need for more domain names precludes the implementation of new general-use TLDs, which can be used by any group.

If another general-use TLD were added, the same name could be registered with multiple TLDs, contributing to confusion among domain names, which would then be distinguished only by a generic suffix.

Instead of instituting new general-use TLDs, critics argue for the implementation of restricted-use TLDs such as dot-banc for financial institutions and dot-union for union sites. This method would increase the number and distinctiveness of available domain names more effectively , observers said.

While NSI supports adding both new general-use and restricted-use TLDs, any changes must be well thought-out, said an NSI spokesman. "You want to remember and learn from the past," he said. "The trademark community wants to be very careful that their names are not registered by someone in bad faith."

>From its meeting outline, it appears that ICANN agrees. The organization >listed protection of intellectual property as one of the six principles >for the introduction of new TLDs. Though the idea was rejected, ICANN even >considered creating a list of famous names that could not be registered by >anyone but the owner.

Some, however, think that ICANN is being overly cautious in adding new TLDs. "It is of critical importance that ICANN move quickly to open up the TLD space as broadly as technically feasible," said David Post, a professor of intellectual property law and cyberspace law at Temple University. "ICANN should not be operating this stranglehold for policy issues. That's not for them to worry about."

Delaying the creation of TLDs because of cyber-squatting fears, Post said, is "like saying Jefferson shouldn't have made the Louisiana Purchase because someone might get mugged in St. Louis."

No matter how quickly ICANN moves, though, the creation of new TLDs seems to be a foregone conclusion. The meeting outline has a schedule for the creation of new TLDs, including an Oct. 1 deadline for TLD proposals and a Nov. 1 date for the announcement of the first group of new TLDs.