{ "id": "R44022", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R44022", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 455579, "date": "2016-09-01", "retrieved": "2016-11-28T21:41:13.152187", "title": "The Future of Internet Governance: Should the United States Relinquish Its Authority over ICANN?", "summary": "Currently, the U.S. government retains limited authority over the Internet\u2019s domain name system, primarily through the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions contract between the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). By virtue of the IANA functions contract, the NTIA exerts a legacy authority and stewardship over ICANN, and arguably has more influence over ICANN and the domain name system (DNS) than other national governments. Currently the IANA functions contract with NTIA expires on September 30, 2016. However, NTIA has the flexibility to extend the contract for any period through September 2019.\nOn March 14, 2014, NTIA announced the intention to transition its stewardship role and procedural authority over key Internet domain name functions to the global Internet multistakeholder community. To accomplish this transition, NTIA asked ICANN to convene interested global Internet stakeholders to develop a transition proposal. NTIA stated that it would not accept any transition proposal that would replace the NTIA role with a government-led or an intergovernmental organization solution. \nFor two years, Internet stakeholders were engaged in a process to develop a transition proposal that will meet NTIA\u2019s criteria. On March 10, 2016, the ICANN Board formally accepted the multistakeholder community\u2019s transition plan and transmitted that plan to NTIA for approval. On June 9, 2016, NTIA announced its determination that the transition plan meets NTIA\u2019s criteria, that the plan is approved, and that the transition process can proceed. Having received notification from ICANN that it had completed implementation tasks associated with the transition plan, NTIA notified ICANN on August 16, 2016, that barring any significant impediment, NTIA intends to allow the IANA functions contract to expire as of October 1, 2016.\nSince NTIA\u2019s announcement of its intention to relinquish its authority over IANA, concerns have risen in Congress over the proposed transition. Critics worry that relinquishing U.S. authority over Internet domain names may offer opportunities for either hostile foreign governments or intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations, to gain undue influence over the Internet. On the other hand, supporters argue that this transition completes the necessary evolution of Internet domain name governance toward the private sector, and will ultimately support and strengthen the multistakeholder model of Internet governance. \nMeanwhile, legislation has been introduced in the 114th Congresses which seeks to prevent, delay, or impose conditions or additional scrutiny on the transition. Of particular note, Section 534 of H.R. 5393, the FY2017 Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) Appropriations Act, would continue to prohibit NTIA from using funds to relinquish its authority over IANA in FY2017. \nThe proposed transition could have a significant impact on the future of Internet governance. National governments are recognizing an increasing stake in ICANN and DNS policy decisions, especially in cases where Internet DNS policy intersects with national laws and interests related to issues such as intellectual property, cybersecurity, privacy, and Internet freedom. How ICANN and the Internet domain name system are ultimately governed may set an important precedent in future policy debates\u2014both domestically and internationally\u2014over how the Internet should be governed, and what role governments and intergovernmental organizations should play.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44022", "sha1": "6f0e193c904c7c96e7640e61b720fd864f9acd68", "filename": "files/20160901_R44022_6f0e193c904c7c96e7640e61b720fd864f9acd68.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44022", "sha1": "2b0e807aa6e6b61a8e70ce18662e3155d8a88066", "filename": "files/20160901_R44022_2b0e807aa6e6b61a8e70ce18662e3155d8a88066.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4871, "name": "Telecommunications & Internet Policy" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 453359, "date": "2016-06-10", "retrieved": "2016-06-21T21:04:25.083819", "title": "The Future of Internet Governance: Should the United States Relinquish Its Authority over ICANN?", "summary": "Currently, the U.S. government retains limited authority over the Internet\u2019s domain name system, primarily through the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions contract between the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). By virtue of the IANA functions contract, the NTIA exerts a legacy authority and stewardship over ICANN, and arguably has more influence over ICANN and the domain name system (DNS) than other national governments. Currently the IANA functions contract with NTIA expires on September 30, 2016. However, NTIA has the flexibility to extend the contract for any period through September 2019.\nOn March 14, 2014, NTIA announced the intention to transition its stewardship role and procedural authority over key Internet domain name functions to the global Internet multistakeholder community. To accomplish this transition, NTIA asked ICANN to convene interested global Internet stakeholders to develop a transition proposal. NTIA stated that it would not accept any transition proposal that would replace the NTIA role with a government-led or an intergovernmental organization solution. \nFor two years, Internet stakeholders have been engaged in a process to develop a transition proposal that will meet NTIA\u2019s criteria. On March 10, 2016, the ICANN Board formally accepted the multistakeholder community\u2019s transition plan and transmitted that plan to NTIA for approval. On June 9, 2016, NTIA announced its determination that the transition plan meets NTIA\u2019s criteria, that the plan is approved, and that the transition process can proceed pending the completion of ICANN\u2019s implementation and testing activities.\nSince NTIA\u2019s announcement of its intention to relinquish its authority over IANA, concerns have risen in Congress over the proposed transition. Critics worry that relinquishing U.S. authority over Internet domain names may offer opportunities for either hostile foreign governments or intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations, to gain undue influence over the Internet. On the other hand, supporters argue that this transition completes the necessary evolution of Internet domain name governance toward the private sector, and will ultimately support and strengthen the multistakeholder model of Internet governance. \nCongress will now assess NTIA\u2019s evaluation of the transition plan and evaluate the transition plan itself. Meanwhile, legislation has been introduced in the 113th and 114th Congresses which would prevent, delay, or impose conditions or additional scrutiny on the transition. Of particular note, Section 534 of H.R. 5393, the FY2017 Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) Appropriations Act, would continue to prohibit NTIA from using funds to relinquish its authority over IANA in FY2017. \nThe proposed transition could have a significant impact on the future of Internet governance. National governments are recognizing an increasing stake in ICANN and DNS policy decisions, especially in cases where Internet DNS policy intersects with national laws and interests related to issues such as intellectual property, cybersecurity, privacy, and Internet freedom. How ICANN and the Internet domain name system are ultimately governed may set an important precedent in future policy debates\u2014both domestically and internationally\u2014over how the Internet should be governed, and what role governments and intergovernmental organizations should play.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44022", "sha1": "4293f1bef39d9be3472bed06b05cb21ff5835674", "filename": "files/20160610_R44022_4293f1bef39d9be3472bed06b05cb21ff5835674.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44022", "sha1": "8636a19fe1db75e943cf7e38c1aa23fee25211d9", "filename": "files/20160610_R44022_8636a19fe1db75e943cf7e38c1aa23fee25211d9.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 2111, "name": "Telecommunications and Media Convergence" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 450959, "date": "2016-03-22", "retrieved": "2016-03-24T16:49:43.311492", "title": "The Future of Internet Governance: Should the United States Relinquish Its Authority over ICANN?", "summary": "Currently, the U.S. government retains limited authority over the Internet\u2019s domain name system, primarily through the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions contract between the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). By virtue of the IANA functions contract, the NTIA exerts a legacy authority and stewardship over ICANN, and arguably has more influence over ICANN and the domain name system (DNS) than other national governments. Currently the IANA functions contract with NTIA expires on September 30, 2016. However, NTIA has the flexibility to extend the contract for any period through September 2019.\nOn March 14, 2014, NTIA announced the intention to transition its stewardship role and procedural authority over key Internet domain name functions to the global Internet multistakeholder community. To accomplish this transition, NTIA asked ICANN to convene interested global Internet stakeholders to develop a transition proposal. NTIA stated that it will not accept any transition proposal that would replace the NTIA role with a government-led or an intergovernmental organization solution. \nFor two years, Internet stakeholders have been engaged in a process to develop a transition proposal that will meet NTIA\u2019s criteria. On March 10, 2016, the ICANN Board formally accepted the multistakeholder community\u2019s transition plan and transmitted that plan to NTIA for approval. NTIA\u2019s goal is to complete its evaluation in 90 days. \nSince NTIA\u2019s announcement of its intention to relinquish its authority over IANA, concerns have risen in Congress over the proposed transition. Critics worry that relinquishing U.S. authority over Internet domain names may offer opportunities for either hostile foreign governments or intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations, to gain undue influence over the Internet. On the other hand, supporters argue that this transition completes the necessary evolution of Internet domain name governance towards the private sector, and will ultimately support and strengthen the multistakeholder model of Internet governance. \nLegislation has been introduced in the 113th and 114th Congresses which would prevent, delay, or impose conditions or additional scrutiny on the transition. In the 114th Congress, H.R. 805/S. 1551 (the DOTCOM Act of 2015) would prohibit NTIA from relinquishing its authority until 30 legislative days after NTIA submits a report to Congress in which it certifies that the transition proposal meets certain criteria. The DOTCOM Act was passed by the House, but has not been passed by the Senate. Meanwhile, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (P.L. 114-113) prevents NTIA from relinquishing its contractual control over IANA in FY2016. \nThe proposed transition could have a significant impact on the future of Internet governance. National governments are recognizing an increasing stake in ICANN and DNS policy decisions, especially in cases where Internet DNS policy intersects with national laws and interests related to issues such as intellectual property, cybersecurity, privacy, and Internet freedom. How ICANN and the Internet domain name system are ultimately governed may set an important precedent in future policy debates\u2014both domestically and internationally\u2014over how the Internet should be governed, and what role governments and intergovernmental organizations should play.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44022", "sha1": "253c331031f33578ee5007c48869534c961bb4e5", "filename": "files/20160322_R44022_253c331031f33578ee5007c48869534c961bb4e5.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44022", "sha1": "8d6a0dcf5f8ed3cb2edf1dd1bc3771ea49e848de", "filename": "files/20160322_R44022_8d6a0dcf5f8ed3cb2edf1dd1bc3771ea49e848de.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 2111, "name": "Telecommunications and Media Convergence" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc795799/", "id": "R44022_2015Nov03", "date": "2015-11-03", "retrieved": "2016-01-13T14:26:20", "title": "The Future of Internet Governance: Should the United States Relinquish Its Authority Over ICANN?", "summary": "This report discusses legislation relevant to the future of Internet governance that has been introduced in the 113th and 114th Congresses which would prevent, delay, or impose conditions or additional scrutiny on the transition of NTIA's stewardship role and procedural authority over key Internet domain name functions to the global Internet multi-stakeholder community.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20151103_R44022_c1a2d30f2ff0c68e04ddd754ff437cbd3a4a1466.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20151103_R44022_c1a2d30f2ff0c68e04ddd754ff437cbd3a4a1466.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Internet", "name": "Internet" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "World Wide Web", "name": "World Wide Web" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Information superhighway", "name": "Information superhighway" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc770538/", "id": "R44022_2015Aug18", "date": "2015-08-18", "retrieved": "2015-11-04T09:58:14", "title": "The Future of Internet Governance: Should the U.S. Relinquish Its Authority Over ICANN?", "summary": "This report discusses legislation over the future of Internet government that has been introduced in the 113th and 114th Congresses which would prevent, delay, or impose conditions or additional scrutiny on the transition.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150818_R44022_cc159902187921957f8c1e38a1fa8b88fc15bc3b.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150818_R44022_cc159902187921957f8c1e38a1fa8b88fc15bc3b.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Internet", "name": "Internet" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "World Wide Web", "name": "World Wide Web" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Information superhighway", "name": "Information superhighway" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc700871/", "id": "R44022_2015Jun24", "date": "2015-06-24", "retrieved": "2015-08-27T16:20:31", "title": "The Future of Internet Governance: Should the U.S. Relinquish Its Authority Over ICANN?", "summary": "This report discusses legislation over the future of Internet government that has been introduced in the 113th and 114th Congresses which would prevent, delay, or impose conditions or additional scrutiny on the transition.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150624_R44022_a0c2abdf6798af5fd3bc030b714a032b78eaee1f.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150624_R44022_a0c2abdf6798af5fd3bc030b714a032b78eaee1f.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Internet", "name": "Internet" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "World Wide Web", "name": "World Wide Web" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Information superhighway", "name": "Information superhighway" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc817261/", "id": "R44022_2015May11", "date": "2015-05-11", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "The Future of Internet Governance: Should the U.S. Relinquish Its Authority Over ICANN?", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150511_R44022_e76ecd1d62aa747ff6c173ec2d24e27360a1e198.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150511_R44022_e76ecd1d62aa747ff6c173ec2d24e27360a1e198.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc627112/", "id": "R44022_2015May05", "date": "2015-05-05", "retrieved": "2015-06-15T14:46:40", "title": "The Future of Internet Governance: Should the U.S. Relinquish Its Authority Over ICANN?", "summary": "The report provides background information on Domain Name System and the role of the U.S. government. This report discusses the U.S. government limited authority over the Internet's domain name system, primarily through the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions contract between the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150505_R44022_890cb1a044e7a58e30d041bdcf2b4ea9d4b588e1.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150505_R44022_890cb1a044e7a58e30d041bdcf2b4ea9d4b588e1.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Internet", "name": "Internet" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Internet service providers", "name": "Internet service providers" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Internet commerce", "name": "Internet commerce" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Computer networks", "name": "Computer networks" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Appropriations", "National Defense", "Science and Technology Policy" ] }