My vision for Nominet over the next three years and my
vision for the internet industry follow similar lines: Nominet's
mission is to help shape the internet to ensure it has a positive
impact on its end-users. We want to do all we can to ensure that
the internet is a trusted and safe space that everyone can be part
of, writes Lesley Cowley, CEO atNominet, the internet registry for .uk domain names.
The internet industry is entering a critical period. Right now,
the industry faces challenges and opportunities in equal measure,
but what's important at a time like this is for industry,
government and wider stakeholders to prove that internet
self-regulation can be truly effective. Ultimately, we all want the
same thing - more representation for the end-user - so we need to
keep talking to each other, sensibly agree the best way to achieve
this and, mostly importantly, take responsibility and action and
deliver on the promises made.
Here are my thoughts on the three areas that I see impacting the
internet industry over the coming years:
Internet governance
To date, the industry and UK government have championed
self-regulation. There is no doubt that both parties are still
committed to innovation through self-regulation but I do hear
statements about the representation of end-user interests and the
protection of end-users much more frequently than ever before. To
achieve this we are going to have to accept that more needs to be
done. For the industry to remain free of red tape it will have to
figure out a way to ensure end-users are at the heart of our
self-regulatory regime.
Right now, we all need to accept greater responsibility for
finding solutions. This will require much better participation and
engagement from all involved. There also remains a huge need for
better dialogue, better participation, better understanding and
better solutions to meet the interests and wellbeing of end-users.
All too often I hear people talking to each other, but not actually
listening. I also see vested interest battle-lines being drawn,
without the acknowledgement that real progress will need real
compromise and new ways of moving forward.
If the industry doesn't take action we open the door to
interventionist governments (both within and outside the European
Union) that will capitalise on the perceived lack of Internet
governance in the UK. The
Digital Britain report is a recent example of this. The report
signals possible legislation compelling ISPs to notify infringers
of third party rights, and keep anonymous data, which seems to
indicate a view that self-regulation has failed on this point.
Icann
Secondly, I see change being signalled by the US government in
its approach to internet governance, particularly with the recent
change in administration. There is also an end-user needs theme
here and in the context of the new generic top-level domain (gTLD)
process, the US Department of Commerce recommends that Icann should
give greater consideration to consumer interests before creating
new gTLDs and renewing registry agreements.
I have a lot of sympathy for Icann; it must feel as though you
just can't please anyone at times. But with so many concerns being
raised about the new gTLD process, I would be surprised if the US
is able to agree to the transition of Icann to the private sector
when the Joint Project Agreement expires later this year. Although
there remains much support for removing the 'oversight' of Icann
from one single government, there is little consensus on what
oversight should replace that of the US. I predict that some
governments will therefore push even more strongly for
inter-governmental oversight of Icann.
Crucial stage of the IGF
Finally, we are coming to a crucial stage in the life of the
Internet Governance Forum
(IGF). The review of the forum has already begun and is due to
report in early 2010. Nominet views this five-year experiment in
global multi-stakeholder dialogue as being very successful. The UK
IGF and the
Nominet
Best Practice challenge have helped to ensure that the UK has
great involvement in the IGF and that there are real life
contributions to inform the policy debate.
Whilst some would have liked the IGF to be a negotiating and
decision making process, it has worked well as a space for the
development of policy dialogue and the sharing of best practices.
What seems to have escaped many is that this form of engagement is
an innovative experiment for the United Nations, in that it seeks
to engage all regions and all participants in policy dialogue. If
that experiment is not seen to be working, there will be
suggestions for alternative replacements.
There is an urgent need for greater awareness of the
international issues currently facing the Internet industry.
Industry, government, and other key stakeholders need to take
responsibility and get involved. The future of the internet as we
know relies on stakeholders to act as one in better understanding
end-user needs and to continue to engage, encourage and provide
examples of best practice industry self regulation.