Wendy Seltzer on ICANN, etc. and History
After sitting through several individual meetings with the DoC and others regarding ICANN, and being told over and over that there was nothing they could do about "it" (whichever "it" happened to be the latest outrage against small business or individuals at the hand of the Content Cartel or others...), and being told that ICANN was "independent" and the DoC was "only" there for the "highest forms of oversight" we find this interesting information - THe US Government TOLD ICANN what to do about the .xxx domain AND the Verisign agreement. Why this and not things like keeping Internet Users out of the ICANN loop? Or the UDRP? Or any of the other myriad of policy making that ICANN did outside of its mandate? Why indeed?
ICANN: What's in the DOC analysis of the Verisign agreement?:
At ALAC's meeting with the ICANN Board, in response to criticism of the price increases built into the Verisign settlement agreement, Paul Twomey suggested that the 7% annual increase had been blessed by U.S. regulators. He said, for the first time, that ICANN had asked the Department of Commerce, which had referred the question to the Department of Justice for competition analysis. The same report was claimed as justification at the public forum the next day.
If these reports are going to be used as a basis or justification for ICANN action, they should be disclosed to the ICANN public. If not, a FOIA request will be in order.
See also John Levine's notes.