English subtitles for clip: File:ICANN History Project - Interview with Peter Dengate-Thrush, ICANN Board Chair (2007-2011) (107E).webm

1
00:00:10,010 --> 00:00:16,975
Peter Dengate Thrush, you served as Chairman of the Board from 2007 to 2011

2
00:00:16,975 --> 00:00:19,978
during the Bush and Obama administrations.

3
00:00:19,978 --> 00:00:21,980
How would you characterize the relationship between

4
00:00:21,980 --> 00:00:24,983
ICANN and the U.S. government during that period?

5
00:00:24,983 --> 00:00:27,986
I think ICANN’s always done very well by having the relationship

6
00:00:27,986 --> 00:00:32,991
that it’s had with the U.S. government, and I’ve often said this to others and thought about it.

7
00:00:32,991 --> 00:00:36,995
If ICANN had been set up or if the Internet had been invented in any other country,

8
00:00:36,995 --> 00:00:40,999
one could imagine it would have been a very difficult relationship with the government.

9
00:00:40,999 --> 00:00:43,960
But in fact, being in the United States in general

10
00:00:43,960 --> 00:00:47,964
with the laws that are available, and the government

11
00:00:47,964 --> 00:00:49,966
has actually I think been a good thing for ICANN.

12
00:00:49,966 --> 00:00:55,972
Interested in your thoughts, and to that point, it would have been easy, it strikes me.

13
00:00:55,972 --> 00:00:59,976
Everybody is aware that the Internet sort of arose from U.S. government research.

14
00:00:59,976 --> 00:01:03,980
It would have been very easy for the U.S. government, the USG to say,

15
00:01:03,980 --> 00:01:09,986
“Okay, throughout this development of this thing called the Internet,

16
00:01:09,986 --> 00:01:14,991
we’re going to preserve control over the Domain Name System, the DNS.”

17
00:01:14,991 --> 00:01:16,951
They didn’t. They went out of their way to say,

18
00:01:16,951 --> 00:01:20,955
“We want to transition this to the private sector.” Why do you think that is?

19
00:01:20,955 --> 00:01:24,959
I think you have to go back even earlier, because there was first of all

20
00:01:24,959 --> 00:01:27,962
no such thing as a Domain Name System when the internet first started.

21
00:01:27,962 --> 00:01:31,966
We had packet switching programs working for quite a long time before

22
00:01:31,966 --> 00:01:34,969
Mr. Mockapetris gave us the Domain Name System.

23
00:01:34,969 --> 00:01:38,973
So you couldn’t have made the split in that way.

24
00:01:38,973 --> 00:01:42,977
Another thing to remember I guess is that there were many alternatives to the Internet

25
00:01:42,977 --> 00:01:44,979
being tested and tried, including at a very high level,

26
00:01:44,979 --> 00:01:48,983
the International Telecommunications Union and other governments

27
00:01:48,983 --> 00:01:52,946
were pushing a completely different set of protocols  than what eventually became the Internet.

28
00:01:52,946 --> 00:02:00,954
So I think we are lucky that first of all, the approach that the inventors took

29
00:02:00,954 --> 00:02:04,958
as well as the U.S. government that mostly employed them was that this was

30
00:02:04,958 --> 00:02:08,962
– probably because they didn’t realize how successful it was going to be,

31
00:02:08,962 --> 00:02:11,965
but also because there was a pattern of, if you like, openness about that sort of technology,

32
00:02:11,965 --> 00:02:16,970
that it was going to be available for the community, for industry to use.

33
00:02:16,970 --> 00:02:19,973
And as a result, we’ve done I think very well out of it.

34
00:02:19,973 --> 00:02:24,978
You said that we’re kind of fortunate that the Internet was invented

35
00:02:24,978 --> 00:02:30,984
in the U.S. in response to my first question. Elaborate on that for me.

36
00:02:30,984 --> 00:02:34,988
Well, of course, the whole Internet wasn’t invented in the U.S.,

37
00:02:34,988 --> 00:02:38,992
but some of the key technology, Vint and Bob Kahn doing the TCP/IP protocols,

38
00:02:38,992 --> 00:02:43,997
probably the key bit. But there are other building blocks before then,

39
00:02:43,997 --> 00:02:48,001
a lot of it done in the U.S. I think the reason why it’s useful that it was in the U.S. was because,

40
00:02:48,001 --> 00:02:54,007
first of all it’s – this is not just my own bias being an English speaker, but –

41
00:02:54,007 --> 00:02:56,968
I think coming from an English-speaking background meant

42
00:02:56,968 --> 00:02:58,970
that its widespread adoption was assisted.

43
00:02:58,970 --> 00:03:02,974
I think coming from a country which had reasonably strong laws,

44
00:03:02,974 --> 00:03:06,978
very strong enforcement of law, strong observance of the rule of law,

45
00:03:06,978 --> 00:03:11,983
all meant that people were confident in building institutions and trusting the contracts for example,

46
00:03:11,983 --> 00:03:16,988
which is how we control most of the behavior, etc. on the Internet or on the domain name system.

47
00:03:16,988 --> 00:03:20,992
We’re all controlled by the contracts. So, having a jurisdiction that

48
00:03:20,992 --> 00:03:23,995
understood contracts and where they could be enforced

49
00:03:23,995 --> 00:03:25,997
I think made a big difference.

50
00:03:25,997 --> 00:03:30,001
It was during your tenure that the JPA, the Joint Project Agreement,

51
00:03:30,001 --> 00:03:35,965
was replaced or succeeded by the Affirmation of Commitments.

52
00:03:35,965 --> 00:03:38,968
First of all, explain to me what the JPA was,

53
00:03:38,968 --> 00:03:41,971
and secondly, why this succession was important.

54
00:03:41,971 --> 00:03:44,974
Well, actually, I think the ending of the JPA was

55
00:03:44,974 --> 00:03:48,978
probably the most significant thing of my term.

56
00:03:48,978 --> 00:03:50,980
A lot of other things happened in that time, a lot of people

57
00:03:50,980 --> 00:03:55,985
can give me credit for working on IDNs or restructuring ICANN

58
00:03:55,985 --> 00:03:59,989
or the New gTLD Program, but in fact, I think

59
00:03:59,989 --> 00:04:02,992
one of the most significant steps was that transition.

60
00:04:02,992 --> 00:04:04,953
So, you need to understand, I think when we started

61
00:04:04,953 --> 00:04:10,959
there were three major agreements that ICANN was involved in.

62
00:04:10,959 --> 00:04:14,963
The first one was the IANA contract, actually managing the database

63
00:04:14,963 --> 00:04:17,966
that tells the Internet domain name system

64
00:04:17,966 --> 00:04:20,969
and the IP addressing system where things are. That was quite important.

65
00:04:20,969 --> 00:04:25,974
The other one was when the U.S. government wanted to encourage

66
00:04:25,974 --> 00:04:29,978
the Internet community to build a structure that in the end became ICANN,

67
00:04:29,978 --> 00:04:34,983
when ICANN emerged, one of several proposals as to how to carry out

68
00:04:34,983 --> 00:04:37,944
the principles of the White Paper and the Green Paper,

69
00:04:37,944 --> 00:04:41,948
there was a Memorandum of Understanding signed between

70
00:04:41,948 --> 00:04:46,953
the U.S. government and this new body called ICANN, which basically said,

71
00:04:46,953 --> 00:04:48,955
“Look, if you do all these things, we will transition control

72
00:04:48,955 --> 00:04:53,960
of this IANA system to this body. But you have to prove yourselves.”

73
00:04:53,960 --> 00:04:57,964
And, you know, we were a startup, starting from scratch.

74
00:04:57,964 --> 00:05:02,969
So the Joint Project Agreement was originally

75
00:05:02,969 --> 00:05:06,973
the Memorandum of Understanding, and what that required ICANN to do

76
00:05:06,973 --> 00:05:09,976
was build safe and stable relationships with all of the key players

77
00:05:09,976 --> 00:05:12,979
in the Internet infrastructure. And that started off having relationships

78
00:05:12,979 --> 00:05:17,984
with almost none of them, and through a variety of political, diplomatic,

79
00:05:17,984 --> 00:05:23,990
contractual and cooperative sort of moves, ICANN has become the place

80
00:05:23,990 --> 00:05:28,995
where for example my background like in the ccTLDs, the ccTLDs signed up and said,

81
00:05:28,995 --> 00:05:30,997
“Yes, we want an organization where we can come and talk

82
00:05:30,997 --> 00:05:36,002
about the interconnectivity issues. We'll talk about our issues at home,

83
00:05:36,002 --> 00:05:38,004
but we need a global place to come.”

84
00:05:38,004 --> 00:05:43,968
When the monopoly in relation to the generic names was being broken up,

85
00:05:43,968 --> 00:05:47,972
originally there was only one registrar. You had to buy all .com, .net

86
00:05:47,972 --> 00:05:51,976
and .org names from one store, and so one of our first exercises

87
00:05:51,976 --> 00:05:53,978
was to bring some competition to that.

88
00:05:53,978 --> 00:05:58,983
That required setting up a stable contract that registrars could sign up to,

89
00:05:58,983 --> 00:06:02,987
and then rules that allowed them to access the registries.

90
00:06:02,987 --> 00:06:05,990
So, each of these was a massive sort of exercise,

91
00:06:05,990 --> 00:06:09,994
creating the concept of registrars and then creating the framework for them to exist,

92
00:06:09,994 --> 00:06:12,997
and then bringing them into ICANN. So the MoU said,

93
00:06:12,997 --> 00:06:17,001
“You need to do all these things, and once you’ve got all these things in place

94
00:06:17,001 --> 00:06:18,961
and you’ve got a safe and stable structure,

95
00:06:18,961 --> 00:06:24,967
we will transition the IANA function to you because you’ll be ready.”

96
00:06:24,967 --> 00:06:29,972
So, much of my time at ICANN was spent trying to live up to that obligation,

97
00:06:29,972 --> 00:06:33,976
create an ICANN that was doing all the things that an ICANN should do

98
00:06:33,976 --> 00:06:36,979
and was trusted by the rest of the community to do them.

99
00:06:36,979 --> 00:06:41,984
So, when I was Chair, I reached the conclusion

100
00:06:41,984 --> 00:06:43,986
with support from the Board that we had got to that point.

101
00:06:43,986 --> 00:06:46,989
We didn’t get there quickly or easily, but

102
00:06:46,989 --> 00:06:50,952
the Memorandum of Understanding which had transitioned itself

103
00:06:50,952 --> 00:06:53,955
by this stage to the Joint Project Agreement was coming to an end,

104
00:06:53,955 --> 00:06:56,958
and we said, “Well, let’s see whether or not we can make that the end.”

105
00:06:56,958 --> 00:06:59,961
It was originally only supposed to last for two years,

106
00:06:59,961 --> 00:07:02,964
and by now it was sort of seven or eight years, nine years old.

107
00:07:02,964 --> 00:07:05,967
I thought – and I think the Board thought –

108
00:07:05,967 --> 00:07:09,971
that we had actually completed the obligations of the original MoU,

109
00:07:09,971 --> 00:07:15,977
and so the first thing we did was put together the previous committee

110
00:07:15,977 --> 00:07:19,981
set up by the CEO, the President’s Strategy Committee, and we repurposed that,

111
00:07:19,981 --> 00:07:23,943
got in some new people and set about on a project that was...

112
00:07:23,943 --> 00:07:26,946
Actually helped triggered or named by Meredith Atwell Baker

113
00:07:26,946 --> 00:07:30,950
who was one of the chief contact at the U.S. government

114
00:07:30,950 --> 00:07:32,952
that we were dealing with at NTIA.

115
00:07:32,952 --> 00:07:36,956
So, she had written us a letter because we had some preliminary conversations

116
00:07:36,956 --> 00:07:41,961
about ending that particular relationship and in the course of that letter,

117
00:07:41,961 --> 00:07:44,964
she said what ICANN needed to do was improve its institutional confidence.

118
00:07:44,964 --> 00:07:48,968
So we gave that to the President’s Strategy Committee and said,

119
00:07:48,968 --> 00:07:52,972
“What do we do to improve institutional confidence in ICANN?”

120
00:07:52,972 --> 00:07:54,974
And that committee then went all around the world

121
00:07:54,974 --> 00:07:57,977
and interviewed community members, outside people.

122
00:07:57,977 --> 00:08:01,981
We had a number of high profile meetings and asked the community,

123
00:08:01,981 --> 00:08:04,984
“What do you think is wrong with ICANN? How do we improve it?"

124
00:08:04,984 --> 00:08:07,987
"And what are particularly the things that will give you confidence

125
00:08:07,987 --> 00:08:10,990
that ICANN can stand alone without

126
00:08:10,990 --> 00:08:13,993
this particular relationship with the U.S. government?”

127
00:08:13,993 --> 00:08:16,996
It was very important, because under the Joint Project Agreement,

128
00:08:16,996 --> 00:08:21,000
ICANN was effectively subject to a lot of Department of Commerce control.

129
00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:26,005
Let me interrupt for just a second. Was that control ever exercised?

130
00:08:26,005 --> 00:08:30,009
Yes, it was. In an administrative kind of way,

131
00:08:30,009 --> 00:08:34,972
what it provided was a series of targets that ICANN had to keep meeting.

132
00:08:34,972 --> 00:08:37,975
I mentioned a couple, contracts with the ccTLDs,

133
00:08:37,975 --> 00:08:42,980
contracts with the address organizations, relationships with business,

134
00:08:42,980 --> 00:08:45,983
relationships with government. So, all of these things had to be done,

135
00:08:45,983 --> 00:08:49,987
but the key requirement was that the Department of Commerce would

136
00:08:49,987 --> 00:08:53,991
– first of all, there was a regular reporting requirement.

137
00:08:53,991 --> 00:08:56,994
So, there was a master-servant relationship set up in that structure,

138
00:08:56,994 --> 00:08:59,997
which we started to feel was no longer appropriate,

139
00:08:59,997 --> 00:09:04,961
and the need to change all that.

140
00:09:04,961 --> 00:09:08,965
So, that was how it was exercised, and probably the most galling

141
00:09:08,965 --> 00:09:12,969
– if you like – or the most obvious feature of this control was,

142
00:09:12,969 --> 00:09:17,974
well, there are two aspects. First of all, when the Department of Commerce

143
00:09:17,974 --> 00:09:20,977
was required to give testimony in Senatorial House hearings.

144
00:09:20,977 --> 00:09:24,981
The U.S. government itself and those institutions made it quite clear

145
00:09:24,981 --> 00:09:26,983
that the Department of Commerce had the power to go

146
00:09:26,983 --> 00:09:28,985
and do things and tell ICANN what to do.

147
00:09:28,985 --> 00:09:33,990
Remember, ICANN is positioning itself as the administrative

148
00:09:33,990 --> 00:09:35,992
and coordinating body for the Internet for the world,

149
00:09:35,992 --> 00:09:38,953
so this particular relationship with the U.S. government

150
00:09:38,953 --> 00:09:41,956
was becoming difficult to sell or maintain.

151
00:09:41,956 --> 00:09:42,957
To sell internationally.

152
00:09:42,957 --> 00:09:45,960
To sell internationally, yes. What we were trying to do is build

153
00:09:45,960 --> 00:09:48,963
the institutional confidence of ICANN in the world,

154
00:09:48,963 --> 00:09:52,967
that the world is going to trust ICANN to manage all these particular things,

155
00:09:52,967 --> 00:09:54,969
set up these contracts and run them fairly.

156
00:09:54,969 --> 00:09:59,974
So, that kind of obvious influence on television

157
00:09:59,974 --> 00:10:01,976
where the Senate or the American –

158
00:10:01,976 --> 00:10:02,977
Are doing hearings.

159
00:10:02,977 --> 00:10:07,982
Political organizations having hearings, telling the Department of Commerce what to get ICANN to do.

160
00:10:07,982 --> 00:10:10,943
Let me ask you this, Peter. I understand that,

161
00:10:10,943 --> 00:10:14,947
I understand you’ve got the U.S. government over here telling Capitol Hill,

162
00:10:14,947 --> 00:10:18,951
“We’ve got final say on this, we’ve got control on this,”

163
00:10:18,951 --> 00:10:22,955
and at the same time that you’re trying to sell the independence

164
00:10:22,955 --> 00:10:24,957
of the organization internationally.

165
00:10:24,957 --> 00:10:28,961
Did the USG, did the U.S. government know or care

166
00:10:28,961 --> 00:10:32,965
about your difficulties in selling ICANN’s independence internationally?

167
00:10:32,965 --> 00:10:34,967
Was it ever a point of discussion?

168
00:10:34,967 --> 00:10:38,971
I think so, but only if you think of the sort of concentric circles

169
00:10:38,971 --> 00:10:41,974
of influence and knowledge that surround anything.

170
00:10:41,974 --> 00:10:44,977
The NTIA officials were very much aware of that.

171
00:10:44,977 --> 00:10:48,981
And they were being subjected to it, because particularly U.S. business

172
00:10:48,981 --> 00:10:51,984
who wanted a particular result on the Internet

173
00:10:51,984 --> 00:10:54,987
in relation to the Domain Name System would come and lobby them.

174
00:10:54,987 --> 00:10:59,992
For example, trademark lobbyists who wanted the rules relating to trademark infringement,

175
00:10:59,992 --> 00:11:04,997
and domain name and things – and we had a lot of problems with cyber squatters and so forth.

176
00:11:04,997 --> 00:11:06,999
Instead of going through an ICANN process to achieve their results,

177
00:11:06,999 --> 00:11:09,001
or sometimes having gone through an ICANN process

178
00:11:09,001 --> 00:11:12,004
and not being happy with the result, they would then go  and lobby

179
00:11:12,004 --> 00:11:14,006
the Department of Commerce and say,

180
00:11:14,006 --> 00:11:16,008
“Well, if you’re controlling these guys, you tell them to do this.”

181
00:11:16,008 --> 00:11:19,970
So, the Department of Commerce were very aware of this,

182
00:11:19,970 --> 00:11:24,975
and the next layer out at state – and I had this happen as well,

183
00:11:24,975 --> 00:11:27,978
sitting next to heads of state and ministers from other countries,

184
00:11:27,978 --> 00:11:31,982
we would be abused, for sometimes quite long periods

185
00:11:31,982 --> 00:11:34,985
over a formal dinner by foreign officials saying,

186
00:11:34,985 --> 00:11:37,988
“Why has the U.S. government got its hands in this process?”

187
00:11:37,988 --> 00:11:40,991
And the particular sticking point which I guess we’ve come to

188
00:11:40,991 --> 00:11:43,994
was actually a very small thing, but you know in diplomacy

189
00:11:43,994 --> 00:11:46,997
with national symbols, some of these things have a high

190
00:11:46,997 --> 00:11:50,000
degree of friction and create a lot more heat.

191
00:11:50,000 --> 00:11:53,963
And one of those was the management of the ccTLD.

192
00:11:53,963 --> 00:11:56,966
So, you’ve got – countries have what they regard

193
00:11:56,966 --> 00:11:59,969
as their own place on the Internet, so for New Zealand it’s .nz,

194
00:11:59,969 --> 00:12:04,974
for France it’s .fr, Brazil has .br, and these are large entities

195
00:12:04,974 --> 00:12:08,978
and they built up a lot of registrations

196
00:12:08,978 --> 00:12:10,980
and that's how the Internet is run in those particular countries.

197
00:12:10,980 --> 00:12:13,983
But any changes to that used to have to require the approval

198
00:12:13,983 --> 00:12:17,987
of a relatively low level Department of Commerce staff person.

199
00:12:17,987 --> 00:12:22,992
And so it looked from the outside as if the national Internet system in

200
00:12:22,992 --> 00:12:26,954
Brazil, France, or New Zealand or any other country was actually,

201
00:12:26,954 --> 00:12:28,956
at the end of the day, subject to U.S. government control.

202
00:12:28,956 --> 00:12:32,960
And so this signaling was much worse than the reality.

203
00:12:32,960 --> 00:12:36,964
The interesting thing here is during the IANA Stewardship Transition,

204
00:12:36,964 --> 00:12:41,969
the argument was made repeatedly by ICANN that,

205
00:12:41,969 --> 00:12:47,975
“Look, it’s hard for us to say that all governments have equal say

206
00:12:47,975 --> 00:12:50,978
when the U.S. government actually has this function.”

207
00:12:50,978 --> 00:12:54,982
You seem to be validating that from quite a ways back.

208
00:12:54,982 --> 00:12:58,944
Certainly. It was certainly a very real problem. But let’s finish the JPA point,

209
00:12:58,944 --> 00:13:01,947
because that was like – there’s a two-step process here.

210
00:13:01,947 --> 00:13:03,949
The first is the... Ending the Joint Project Agreement,

211
00:13:03,949 --> 00:13:06,952
which was ICANN’s agreement with the Department of Commerce.

212
00:13:06,952 --> 00:13:08,954
So, we had this process where we said, “We think we’re finished.

213
00:13:08,954 --> 00:13:11,957
We think we’ve done all the things that are in the JPA.”

214
00:13:11,957 --> 00:13:13,959
We went around the world and had the President’s Strategy Committee

215
00:13:13,959 --> 00:13:16,962
ask everybody, and the issues that they raised were captured.

216
00:13:16,962 --> 00:13:18,964
They don’t want the system able to be taken over,

217
00:13:18,964 --> 00:13:24,970
and a very number of other things. So, we thought we could perform those.

218
00:13:24,970 --> 00:13:28,974
Then we had a period living up to that, and then when the time came,

219
00:13:28,974 --> 00:13:31,977
we said, “No, we are not going to sign an extension of that.”

220
00:13:31,977 --> 00:13:35,981
So then we went into negotiations, and it was  at the Sydney meeting,

221
00:13:35,981 --> 00:13:40,986
2009, where we had the session with the Department of Commerce

222
00:13:40,986 --> 00:13:42,988
and said, “Look, we’re not going to do this anymore.

223
00:13:42,988 --> 00:13:45,991
We’re not going to go sit in this master-servant relationship.

224
00:13:45,991 --> 00:13:48,994
We’re not going to be reporting to you.” And I didn’t mention the other thing,

225
00:13:48,994 --> 00:13:49,995
I mentioned the Senate and the other hearings.

226
00:13:49,995 --> 00:13:52,998
The Department of Commerce itself used to say,

227
00:13:52,998 --> 00:13:56,001
“We’re going to have a hearing into how good ICANN is or not,”

228
00:13:56,001 --> 00:14:00,005
and we wanted that to stop. We didn’t want ICANN’s performance

229
00:14:00,005 --> 00:14:03,008
to be being reviewed against a set of criteria

230
00:14:03,008 --> 00:14:04,969
created by the U.S. government, by the U.S. government.

231
00:14:04,969 --> 00:14:08,973
So the brilliance of the Affirmation of Commitments was that all that stopped,

232
00:14:08,973 --> 00:14:10,975
and what the Affirmation of Commitments said was

233
00:14:10,975 --> 00:14:14,979
the community is going to review ICANN, not the U.S. government.

234
00:14:14,979 --> 00:14:16,981
So when you were having this conversation with Commerce

235
00:14:16,981 --> 00:14:20,985
and you were going, “Okay, we want this to stop,” and you were advancing

236
00:14:20,985 --> 00:14:24,989
what later became the AoC or conceptually the AoC,

237
00:14:24,989 --> 00:14:28,993
what came back at you from Commerce, from the U.S. government?

238
00:14:28,993 --> 00:14:31,996
Mostly very helpful, and this is another reason why –

239
00:14:31,996 --> 00:14:32,997
They weren’t resistant to the idea?

240
00:14:32,997 --> 00:14:36,000
They wanted to do the right thing, and I give them a lot of credit, always.

241
00:14:36,000 --> 00:14:41,964
We had different views, but it was never adversarial, and it was always

242
00:14:41,964 --> 00:14:46,969
– this was the original plan, can we do it?

243
00:14:46,969 --> 00:14:51,974
I have to say, earlier administrations that I dealt with were

244
00:14:51,974 --> 00:14:55,978
and possibly rightly so were of the view that ICANN was not really in their term

245
00:14:55,978 --> 00:15:00,983
– I’m thinking back two or three years before the 2009 meeting,

246
00:15:00,983 --> 00:15:03,986
when we started raising these conversations,

247
00:15:03,986 --> 00:15:05,988
and, you know, ICANN probably had a lot of work to do.

248
00:15:05,988 --> 00:15:08,991
But as I say, we thought by 2009, we’d got to the point where

249
00:15:08,991 --> 00:15:11,952
we no longer needed to report to the Department of Commerce,

250
00:15:11,952 --> 00:15:13,954
the Department of Commerce should not be having hearings

251
00:15:13,954 --> 00:15:17,958
reviewing ICANN’s progress and maintaining this sort of control.

252
00:15:17,958 --> 00:15:22,963
So, the AoC, the ending of the JPA and creating the AoC

253
00:15:22,963 --> 00:15:24,965
was a major milestone of ICANN saying,

254
00:15:24,965 --> 00:15:27,968
“We’re going to stand on our own now. We’re going to be subject to full review,

255
00:15:27,968 --> 00:15:29,970
but it’s going to be a review by the entire community

256
00:15:29,970 --> 00:15:34,975
against a whole series of targets. And the Department of Commerce

257
00:15:34,975 --> 00:15:38,979
is going to have a role in doing that review as part of the community.”

258
00:15:38,979 --> 00:15:40,981
And that’s what set the scene then for the second one,

259
00:15:40,981 --> 00:15:45,945
which was the transition of the – the end of the bargain.

260
00:15:45,945 --> 00:15:51,951
If ICANN gets itself to be a major, global, safe, stable manager repository

261
00:15:51,951 --> 00:15:55,955
for these Internet functions, then the last thing to go

262
00:15:55,955 --> 00:15:57,957
would be the IANA functions coming into ICANN.

263
00:15:57,957 --> 00:15:59,959
How did the Affirmation of Commitments

264
00:15:59,959 --> 00:16:02,962
– both conceptually before they were drawn and when they were signed –

265
00:16:02,962 --> 00:16:04,964
go over on Capitol Hill?

266
00:16:04,964 --> 00:16:07,967
Well, you’d have to ask them.

267
00:16:07,967 --> 00:16:09,969
I’m sure you heard things.

268
00:16:09,969 --> 00:16:13,973
I don’t think everybody understood it, quite frankly,

269
00:16:13,973 --> 00:16:16,976
but I think it was sufficiently clear that, first of all,

270
00:16:16,976 --> 00:16:19,979
the Department of Commerce had a continuing role in that process.

271
00:16:19,979 --> 00:16:21,981
That was I think was one of the worries; is there a link?

272
00:16:21,981 --> 00:16:26,986
Do we have a way into this process? Because it’s relatively arcane.

273
00:16:26,986 --> 00:16:31,991
And what are the goals and what are the principles?

274
00:16:31,991 --> 00:16:35,995
They are I think principles that could be relatively easily explained

275
00:16:35,995 --> 00:16:38,998
and sold in a political process. They’re about openness,

276
00:16:38,998 --> 00:16:42,001
they’re about transparency, they’re about accountability, responsibility.

277
00:16:42,001 --> 00:16:46,005
So I think in the end, it was a little bit of explaining but not a hard sell.

278
00:16:46,005 --> 00:16:50,009
The main takeaway I’m getting, what I’m hearing you say is

279
00:16:50,009 --> 00:16:55,973
while ICANN may have advanced the concept of an AoC,

280
00:16:55,973 --> 00:16:57,975
Commerce certainly wasn’t resistant.

281
00:16:57,975 --> 00:17:01,979
They were receptive to the idea, and actually collaborated

282
00:17:01,979 --> 00:17:04,982
in moving it forward. Is that a correct interpretation?

283
00:17:04,982 --> 00:17:07,985
Absolutely. The idea of the AoC came out of a particular set of conversations with them,

284
00:17:07,985 --> 00:17:12,990
and we go back now, I can’t quite remember who actually said what at the time,

285
00:17:12,990 --> 00:17:15,993
but it was clear we wanted to end the process where

286
00:17:15,993 --> 00:17:17,995
the Department of Commerce was investigating

287
00:17:17,995 --> 00:17:20,998
and managing and reporting on ICANN to some process there

288
00:17:20,998 --> 00:17:23,000
where the community was doing it.

289
00:17:23,000 --> 00:17:27,963
That was the shift. The Department of Commerce didn’t want

290
00:17:27,963 --> 00:17:30,966
to be able to suddenly have no relationship, to have none of these things

291
00:17:30,966 --> 00:17:33,969
that were there before, and neither did we.

292
00:17:33,969 --> 00:17:36,972
In other words, it was the Department of Commerce moving out

293
00:17:36,972 --> 00:17:39,975
of the role where it did these things, and creating a structure

294
00:17:39,975 --> 00:17:42,978
where the community did them. That was the psychological

295
00:17:42,978 --> 00:17:45,981
and political and important shift.

296
00:17:45,981 --> 00:17:48,984
When you think back about your tenure as Chair,

297
00:17:48,984 --> 00:17:53,989
you have already said that the AoC, this transition from the JPA

298
00:17:53,989 --> 00:17:57,951
to the succeeding AoC was a major point

299
00:17:57,951 --> 00:18:00,954
in terms of defining the USG’s relationship with ICANN.

300
00:18:00,954 --> 00:18:01,955
Yes.

301
00:18:01,955 --> 00:18:03,957
Were there other points during your tenure?

302
00:18:03,957 --> 00:18:09,963
We had input from the USG in a number of ways through the GAC on issues,

303
00:18:09,963 --> 00:18:11,965
but we also had other conversations.

304
00:18:11,965 --> 00:18:17,971
I suppose the obvious one is XXX, where one of the early applications,

305
00:18:17,971 --> 00:18:20,974
one of these very limited rounds for a new top-level domain.

306
00:18:20,974 --> 00:18:23,977
But it was before the New G Program actually began, right?

307
00:18:23,977 --> 00:18:26,980
Well before. This was one of the old

308
00:18:26,980 --> 00:18:29,983
– remember, there were two small rounds of new gTLDs.

309
00:18:29,983 --> 00:18:32,945
Part of the ICANN DNA was to come up with a process for new gTLDs.

310
00:18:32,945 --> 00:18:33,946
Right.

311
00:18:33,946 --> 00:18:37,950
The first one was we added seven, and then the second round

312
00:18:37,950 --> 00:18:42,955
there was the idea of the sponsored – there could be a community

313
00:18:42,955 --> 00:18:45,958
that had its own particular TLD the community could sponsor,

314
00:18:45,958 --> 00:18:48,961
so they were called sponsored TLDs, and the XXX one I think

315
00:18:48,961 --> 00:18:50,963
came out of that, where there was a...

316
00:18:50,963 --> 00:18:54,967
People thought the adult content industry could be defined

317
00:18:54,967 --> 00:18:57,970
and could have a place on the Internet for adult content.

318
00:18:57,970 --> 00:19:02,975
Now, pornography is legal in many countries,

319
00:19:02,975 --> 00:19:06,979
but it still created a huge amount of excitement from people

320
00:19:06,979 --> 00:19:09,982
who are opposed to adult content.

321
00:19:09,982 --> 00:19:13,986
And so there are some strong lobbyists in this country,

322
00:19:13,986 --> 00:19:17,990
in the United States, and they put a lot of pressure

323
00:19:17,990 --> 00:19:20,993
on their Congressmen and they’re attemp to try and go back down

324
00:19:20,993 --> 00:19:22,995
that control route that we talked about, and put pressure on

325
00:19:22,995 --> 00:19:25,998
the Department of Commerce to put pressure on ICANN.

326
00:19:25,998 --> 00:19:26,999
To block it?

327
00:19:26,999 --> 00:19:28,000
To block it. And I have to say –

328
00:19:28,000 --> 00:19:30,002
And what form did that pressure take?

329
00:19:30,002 --> 00:19:34,006
Well, I was never... As a Board member through that process,

330
00:19:34,006 --> 00:19:37,968
and eventually as Chair, I was never aware of any process.

331
00:19:37,968 --> 00:19:42,973
There have been accusations by people and there was quite a major case.

332
00:19:42,973 --> 00:19:46,977
The case went before a tribunal, eventually found that ICANN

333
00:19:46,977 --> 00:19:49,980
should have granted it in the first place and sent it back

334
00:19:49,980 --> 00:19:52,983
for reconsideration, and the Board did grant it.

335
00:19:52,983 --> 00:19:56,987
So I know as a result of that that there were allegations made

336
00:19:56,987 --> 00:19:58,989
that there was pressure put on individual

337
00:19:58,989 --> 00:20:03,994
– as I say, I’m unaware of any of that. And to me it was always

338
00:20:03,994 --> 00:20:06,997
a relatively straightforward... As far as there’s applicant dissent,

339
00:20:06,997 --> 00:20:10,000
has it met the conditions? And I was one of the minority on the Board

340
00:20:10,000 --> 00:20:11,960
who thought that the applicant had met the conditions

341
00:20:11,960 --> 00:20:13,962
and was ready to let them go.

342
00:20:13,962 --> 00:20:20,969
The issue for us was that we had a meeting just before the final vote

343
00:20:20,969 --> 00:20:23,972
to actually admit XXX at the San Francisco meeting,

344
00:20:23,972 --> 00:20:27,976
and we had a visit from the Assistant Secretary of the Department of Commerce,

345
00:20:27,976 --> 00:20:31,980
Larry Strickling, with whom we have a very good relationship.

346
00:20:31,980 --> 00:20:34,983
He said he wanted to talk to the senior leadership

347
00:20:34,983 --> 00:20:37,986
about this decision that was coming up.

348
00:20:37,986 --> 00:20:40,989
So we convened a meeting that morning.

349
00:20:40,989 --> 00:20:48,956
From memory, it was my Vice Chair, the CEO and legal counsel

350
00:20:48,956 --> 00:20:53,961
met with Larry Strickling, and I don’t want to characterize that

351
00:20:53,961 --> 00:20:58,966
as other than a discussion. Certainly, the Department of Commerce

352
00:20:58,966 --> 00:21:02,970
didn’t say that we should do anything or not do anything.

353
00:21:02,970 --> 00:21:05,973
There were some questions asked about our processes

354
00:21:05,973 --> 00:21:10,978
and whether we’d thought through what might happen with the consequences

355
00:21:10,978 --> 00:21:14,982
of a decision going either way. We said that we had, and the meeting came to an end.

356
00:21:14,982 --> 00:21:18,944
But was the mere presence of the Assistant Secretary in itself

357
00:21:18,944 --> 00:21:22,948
– was his mere presence and saying, “Proceed with caution on this,”

358
00:21:22,948 --> 00:21:27,953
was that in itself a form of light pressure

359
00:21:27,953 --> 00:21:31,957
or interest, or was it meant to influence?

360
00:21:31,957 --> 00:21:35,961
It may have been, but it was a part of the many,

361
00:21:35,961 --> 00:21:38,964
many submissions that we were receiving.

362
00:21:38,964 --> 00:21:42,968
If you’d like, it was perhaps the last one, and it was

363
00:21:42,968 --> 00:21:48,974
– not everybody would have had quite that access to the key decision makers.

364
00:21:48,974 --> 00:21:53,979
It wasn’t to the whole Board. So, but then we had

365
00:21:53,979 --> 00:21:57,983
a very long and healthy working relationship with the Department of Commerce,

366
00:21:57,983 --> 00:22:02,988
so it was not unusual to have

367
00:22:02,988 --> 00:22:05,991
a more special meeting with their representatives, say,

368
00:22:05,991 --> 00:22:08,994
than say another government. But it was different.

369
00:22:08,994 --> 00:22:10,996
It would have been harder for another government

370
00:22:10,996 --> 00:22:12,998
to have had that meeting at that time.

371
00:22:12,998 --> 00:22:21,006
Throughout the process of ICANN’s genesis, its alteration,

372
00:22:21,006 --> 00:22:25,969
the maturation of ICANN is often mentioned in relationship

373
00:22:25,969 --> 00:22:32,976
specifically to the IANA transition. The U.S. government

374
00:22:32,976 --> 00:22:37,981
testified on The Hill and said repeatedly, “We waited until ICANN was mature.

375
00:22:37,981 --> 00:22:41,985
We wanted it to be mature enough. It was a maturation process.”

376
00:22:41,985 --> 00:22:46,990
I’m wondering what that sort of verbiage uttered by the DoC,

377
00:22:46,990 --> 00:22:50,994
the Department of Commerce, meant to the hierarchy of ICANN.

378
00:22:50,994 --> 00:22:55,999
Was there a sense in ICANN, a resentment that they’re saying,

379
00:22:55,999 --> 00:22:59,961
“We’re already mature,” or was there an acknowledgement, “Yes, we’ve got a ways to go.”

380
00:22:59,961 --> 00:23:02,964
Well, you have to understand I was off the Board

381
00:23:02,964 --> 00:23:04,966
by the time that actually happened.

382
00:23:04,966 --> 00:23:08,970
But at any point, it was still an issue during your tenure. Maturation, right?

383
00:23:08,970 --> 00:23:13,975
Yes. I think the most important signal that I can recall

384
00:23:13,975 --> 00:23:17,979
or that I certainly encouraged was that after the signing of

385
00:23:17,979 --> 00:23:19,981
the Affirmation of Commitments, we no longer heard anyone

386
00:23:19,981 --> 00:23:24,986
talk about the ICANN experiment. For a long time, all through those early years,

387
00:23:24,986 --> 00:23:26,988
it was the ICANN experiment.

388
00:23:26,988 --> 00:23:27,989
Interesting.

389
00:23:27,989 --> 00:23:29,991
It was the first global multistakeholder body,

390
00:23:29,991 --> 00:23:33,954
it’s the first body ever of its kind to take control, and manage and coordinate

391
00:23:33,954 --> 00:23:36,957
what’s turned out to be the operating system for the planet.

392
00:23:36,957 --> 00:23:41,962
It’s never been done before, and it was always regarded with some concern.

393
00:23:41,962 --> 00:23:44,965
It’s the only place where governments don’t have a dominant role.

394
00:23:44,965 --> 00:23:47,968
They have an equal role in providing input to the policies.

395
00:23:47,968 --> 00:23:51,972
It’s not controlled by trademark owners or business constituencies.

396
00:23:51,972 --> 00:23:56,977
So, the genius of ICANN was creating the structure that took all these forces,

397
00:23:56,977 --> 00:23:59,980
many of them great disparities of power.

398
00:23:59,980 --> 00:24:02,983
Governments have a great deal more power than a ccTLD operator

399
00:24:02,983 --> 00:24:05,944
or a great deal more power than a single trademark owner,

400
00:24:05,944 --> 00:24:08,947
or a woman who’s being stalked and wants protection, etc.

401
00:24:08,947 --> 00:24:12,951
So there’s a huge variety of issues, and what I think we’ve done well at ICANN

402
00:24:12,951 --> 00:24:15,954
– it can always be improved – is we’ve got the power structure right.

403
00:24:15,954 --> 00:24:19,958
So, those forces are held in a reasonably useful way

404
00:24:19,958 --> 00:24:21,960
to produce useful results.

405
00:24:21,960 --> 00:24:25,964
Clearly, the IANA Stewardship Transition happened

406
00:24:25,964 --> 00:24:28,967
after you left the Board, but you’re still a member of the ICANN community.

407
00:24:28,967 --> 00:24:34,973
How would you define the most challenging elements of that transition?

408
00:24:34,973 --> 00:24:37,976
Well, there are a number of aspects.

409
00:24:37,976 --> 00:24:41,980
The first thing was, again, this concept of accountability

410
00:24:41,980 --> 00:24:45,984
and responsibility which we embedded in the most important of

411
00:24:45,984 --> 00:24:48,987
the first of the reviews under the AoC,

412
00:24:48,987 --> 00:24:53,992
that there had to be – whoever was running this thing or managing, coordinating –

413
00:24:53,992 --> 00:24:56,995
we used different verbs – whoever was performing these functions

414
00:24:56,995 --> 00:24:59,998
had to have the trust of the community.

415
00:24:59,998 --> 00:25:02,000
They had to be accountable, they had to have transparency

416
00:25:02,000 --> 00:25:04,002
where transparency is needed, and there had to be methods

417
00:25:04,002 --> 00:25:09,007
of redress for people who had been – or thought they had been – damaged in the process.

418
00:25:09,007 --> 00:25:11,009
So, there was another exercise that we started

419
00:25:11,009 --> 00:25:12,969
with the President’s Strategy Committee.

420
00:25:12,969 --> 00:25:15,972
it was the result of the Accountability and Review Teams,

421
00:25:15,972 --> 00:25:17,974
by which time there had been two of these going through and saying,

422
00:25:17,974 --> 00:25:21,978
“Well, how is ICANN accountable? To whom is it accountable?”

423
00:25:21,978 --> 00:25:26,983
So, there was a sense that this was probably the last chance to really focus.

424
00:25:26,983 --> 00:25:31,988
Once the transition has occurred, people thought it was going to be

425
00:25:31,988 --> 00:25:35,992
much harder to shift views at ICANN about accountability.

426
00:25:35,992 --> 00:25:37,994
I don’t agree with that. I don’t agree with some of the

427
00:25:37,994 --> 00:25:40,997
black and white conversations that went on.

428
00:25:40,997 --> 00:25:42,999
“This is the only chance we’ll ever have to improve ICANN.”

429
00:25:42,999 --> 00:25:46,962
I think it was a major chance and people were right to take advantage of it,

430
00:25:46,962 --> 00:25:48,964
but ICANN will continue to improve, there are continuing to be

431
00:25:48,964 --> 00:25:52,968
accountability mechanisms, and all these things I think will keep growing.

432
00:25:52,968 --> 00:25:55,971
So, getting the accountability and the transparency of

433
00:25:55,971 --> 00:25:59,975
process and redress for grievances, etc., getting those right was important.

434
00:25:59,975 --> 00:26:03,979
And then proving that they could handle the technical structure,

435
00:26:03,979 --> 00:26:05,981
and then having an escape route.

436
00:26:05,981 --> 00:26:10,986
If something – if all of this work doesn’t work, what’s plan B?

437
00:26:10,986 --> 00:26:13,989
And I think those were the issues that the community grappled with,

438
00:26:13,989 --> 00:26:15,991
and I think in the end came a quite good solution.

439
00:26:15,991 --> 00:26:18,952
Let me ask you this: it’s been stated many times that

440
00:26:18,952 --> 00:26:22,956
that transition fully to the private sector

441
00:26:22,956 --> 00:26:26,960
was envisioned to occur within a couple of years.

442
00:26:26,960 --> 00:26:27,961
Yes.

443
00:26:27,961 --> 00:26:29,462
It took much longer than that.

444
00:26:29,462 --> 00:26:30,463
Yes.

445
00:26:30,463 --> 00:26:31,965
Why?

446
00:26:31,965 --> 00:26:35,969
Well, partly because every year, it got bigger.

447
00:26:35,969 --> 00:26:38,972
Every year, the Internet was just growing at an enormous speed.

448
00:26:38,972 --> 00:26:44,978
I think when we started this idea – and I was involved from 1998 onwards –

449
00:26:44,978 --> 00:26:48,982
there were many fewer people on the Internet. There was not...

450
00:26:48,982 --> 00:26:52,944
So, what was happening as ICANN was growing and trying to

451
00:26:52,944 --> 00:26:55,947
become the body to manage these things, the size of the job

452
00:26:55,947 --> 00:26:58,950
was getting exponentially bigger every day. So that’s one thing.

453
00:26:58,950 --> 00:27:01,953
It sounds like you’re saying almost the goals were being moved.

454
00:27:01,953 --> 00:27:04,956
I think they were the same goals; manage these things,

455
00:27:04,956 --> 00:27:06,958
get them right, do them, but the number of people

456
00:27:06,958 --> 00:27:09,961
and the players and the scale was going up.

457
00:27:09,961 --> 00:27:10,962
I see.

458
00:27:10,962 --> 00:27:13,965
The targets were the same, but there was just more of it.

459
00:27:13,965 --> 00:27:16,968
So I think that’s one thing. The other thing was

460
00:27:16,968 --> 00:27:19,971
– and you get different views about this – the people who had vested

461
00:27:19,971 --> 00:27:24,976
interest in the status quo and change is always difficult.

462
00:27:24,976 --> 00:27:27,979
There is people with an interest who are fighting to keep it,

463
00:27:27,979 --> 00:27:30,982
but there’s also the inertia of people who don’t really understand

464
00:27:30,982 --> 00:27:32,984
and don’t care, and you have to move them.

465
00:27:32,984 --> 00:27:38,990
There was no real opposition to it. It was just getting it right.

466
00:27:38,990 --> 00:27:44,996
There was opposition to it on The Hill, even in its final days, I mean...

467
00:27:44,996 --> 00:27:50,001
Sorry, when you say opposition to it, I meant as ICANN as a  concept.

468
00:27:50,001 --> 00:27:53,004
Forgive me, as opposed to the transition.

469
00:27:53,004 --> 00:27:54,005
The transition itself, yes.

470
00:27:54,005 --> 00:27:58,968
But by extension, that was at play with the IANA Stewardship Transition.

471
00:27:58,968 --> 00:27:59,969
Yes.

472
00:27:59,969 --> 00:28:02,972
And it came out in the testimony and the verbiage on Capitol Hill.

473
00:28:02,972 --> 00:28:05,975
What was your reaction at that point?

474
00:28:05,975 --> 00:28:09,979
I think it’s the same. Well, first of all, there was a lot of

475
00:28:09,979 --> 00:28:12,982
misunderstanding about what it was all about,

476
00:28:12,982 --> 00:28:15,985
and there were a number of politicians who – being politicians –

477
00:28:15,985 --> 00:28:18,988
tried to take advantage for political purposes, and in the course of that,

478
00:28:18,988 --> 00:28:20,990
said some things that really suited perhaps their audience

479
00:28:20,990 --> 00:28:23,993
rather than had much grounding in technical Internet

480
00:28:23,993 --> 00:28:25,995
sort of structures or relationships.

481
00:28:25,995 --> 00:28:29,999
So, it’s good to put some of that aside, I think.

482
00:28:29,999 --> 00:28:33,962
But other than that, there was a misunderstanding,

483
00:28:33,962 --> 00:28:36,965
I think a general misunderstanding that somehow, the U.S. government

484
00:28:36,965 --> 00:28:41,970
had some really powerful control over the Internet. And it doesn’t. It didn’t.

485
00:28:41,970 --> 00:28:44,973
If it had, the Internet would have grown very differently.

486
00:28:44,973 --> 00:28:46,975
It would have grown somewhere else, because the reason why it’s grown

487
00:28:46,975 --> 00:28:50,979
so well is because it hasn’t had that kind of central, top-down control.

488
00:28:50,979 --> 00:28:52,981
The ability to innovate at the edge and for people to

489
00:28:52,981 --> 00:28:58,987
add things without permission. Permissionless innovation has been why it’s been successful.

490
00:28:58,987 --> 00:29:01,990
But there was still some sense from people who didn’t understand

491
00:29:01,990 --> 00:29:05,952
that it must be like another company or another technology,

492
00:29:05,952 --> 00:29:07,954
where somebody owns it and can control it.

493
00:29:07,954 --> 00:29:12,959
So, I think a lot of the exercise was just getting through to them that,

494
00:29:12,959 --> 00:29:18,965
“Look, what we’re talking about is the last of a relatively low level technical function.

495
00:29:18,965 --> 00:29:20,967
It’s important, and somebody has to do it,

496
00:29:20,967 --> 00:29:23,970
but look, these guys have actually been doing it for the last 15 years.

497
00:29:23,970 --> 00:29:26,973
They’ve done it without a problem.

498
00:29:26,973 --> 00:29:28,975
Why don’t we let them sort of carry on doing it?”

499
00:29:28,975 --> 00:29:32,979
And I think once people got over that, it was a lot easier.

500
00:29:32,979 --> 00:29:37,984
I’m wondering, as a citizen – as not a U.S. citizen

501
00:29:37,984 --> 00:29:43,948
but as a citizen of New Zealand, did that give you a lens that was beneficial?

502
00:29:43,948 --> 00:29:47,952
Obviously, it was different, but was it perhaps beneficial

503
00:29:47,952 --> 00:29:51,956
or maybe irrelevant in viewing ICANN’s relationship

504
00:29:51,956 --> 00:29:53,958
with the U.S. government?

505
00:29:53,958 --> 00:29:56,961
I think it probably did. I think, first of all, New Zealanders

506
00:29:56,961 --> 00:29:58,963
have a very robust view about the government.

507
00:29:58,963 --> 00:30:00,965
It’s very clear in New Zealand to New Zealanders that the government

508
00:30:00,965 --> 00:30:04,969
works for New Zealanders. And we tend to have a view that

509
00:30:04,969 --> 00:30:06,971
that government is best which governs least.

510
00:30:06,971 --> 00:30:09,974
We want the government to do things that we specify.

511
00:30:09,974 --> 00:30:13,978
So, we come I think with a relatively as I say robust view to government

512
00:30:13,978 --> 00:30:17,982
and keeping government in check, but using governments where it’s helpful.

513
00:30:17,982 --> 00:30:23,988
And so we tend to approach this problem in the same kind of a way.

514
00:30:23,988 --> 00:30:27,992
And I think the other thing was the U.S., to the people living in the U.S.,

515
00:30:27,992 --> 00:30:32,997
the U.S. is so huge, there’s so much going on that there’s a tendency

516
00:30:32,997 --> 00:30:37,001
– or there’s no need to actually look outside the United States

517
00:30:37,001 --> 00:30:40,004
to find out how other people are solving often similar problems.

518
00:30:40,004 --> 00:30:43,007
So, I think there was a little bit of being able to come in

519
00:30:43,007 --> 00:30:46,970
from the outside slightly and say, “Look, just because this has grown up this way

520
00:30:46,970 --> 00:30:49,973
and just because it’s being done that way, doesn’t mean we have to keep doing it.

521
00:30:49,973 --> 00:30:54,978
Let’s try this new global multistakeholder body instead,

522
00:30:54,978 --> 00:30:58,982
instead of a government department controlling a corporation.

523
00:30:58,982 --> 00:31:01,985
Let’s try and open it up to the world.

524
00:31:01,985 --> 00:31:03,987
And if it doesn’t work, we can do something else.”

525
00:31:03,987 --> 00:31:06,990
I think that’s the other thing about New Zealand, being so small,

526
00:31:06,990 --> 00:31:08,992
we’ve always been ready to try things because if it doesn’t work...

527
00:31:08,992 --> 00:31:09,993
It’s easier to pivot.

528
00:31:09,993 --> 00:31:10,994
It’s easier to pivot.

529
00:31:10,994 --> 00:31:14,998
Peter, is there anything else that we’ve not touched on

530
00:31:14,998 --> 00:31:18,001
that you think is particularly relevant when we discuss

531
00:31:18,001 --> 00:31:20,962
ICANN’s historic relationship with the U.S. government?

532
00:31:20,962 --> 00:31:23,965
I think it’s probably good to close off on the point that

533
00:31:23,965 --> 00:31:28,970
all of the accountability and transparency kind of issues

534
00:31:28,970 --> 00:31:32,974
that were in the AoC, have survived and have migrated now

535
00:31:32,974 --> 00:31:35,977
into the Bylaws. And so what’s happened?

536
00:31:35,977 --> 00:31:40,982
Because there’s an enormous issue of, “This might be the last chance, let’s get it right,”

537
00:31:40,982 --> 00:31:47,989
I was criticized because I saw the AoC as a temporary device

538
00:31:47,989 --> 00:31:52,952
for getting to this point, and said so at a meeting of the European Parliament at some stage,

539
00:31:52,952 --> 00:31:55,955
Committee of the European Parliament. And people thought,

540
00:31:55,955 --> 00:31:59,959
“Does that mean that those principles are temporary?”

541
00:31:59,959 --> 00:32:03,963
No, those principles have survived and they have migrated into the Bylaws.

542
00:32:03,963 --> 00:32:06,966
So, those have got stronger. What we’ve done away with is the vehicle

543
00:32:06,966 --> 00:32:09,969
that we used to carry them there. So, I think that’s very important,

544
00:32:09,969 --> 00:32:11,971
that we’ve used this process...

545
00:32:11,971 --> 00:32:13,973
You’re saying the embodiment of those in the Bylaws

546
00:32:13,973 --> 00:32:17,977
actually acts as more reinforcement than standalone in the AoC.

547
00:32:17,977 --> 00:32:19,979
They’re now in a much stronger place than the AoC.

548
00:32:19,979 --> 00:32:22,982
The AoC was still a contract. Now they’re in the DNA of ICANN,

549
00:32:22,982 --> 00:32:26,945
so it’s going to be much harder to – and that’s where they should be,

550
00:32:26,945 --> 00:32:28,947
these obligations of accountability and transparency.

551
00:32:28,947 --> 00:32:32,951
And again, they can be changed by the community, so I think that’s important.

552
00:32:32,951 --> 00:32:35,954
And I think the other thing that’s important is to say thank you to

553
00:32:35,954 --> 00:32:40,959
Larry Strickling and Fiona Alexander.

554
00:32:40,959 --> 00:32:43,962
I haven’t mentioned Fiona, but she’s been there through most of this,

555
00:32:43,962 --> 00:32:47,966
providing an enormous amount of cohesiveness to all of this process.

556
00:32:47,966 --> 00:32:50,969
Larry Strickling being the Assistant Secretary at the Department of Commerce

557
00:32:50,969 --> 00:32:53,972
and Fiona being one of the people on his staff who worked with ICANN.

558
00:32:53,972 --> 00:32:58,977
Exactly. And I think there’s a whole lot of reasons why

559
00:32:58,977 --> 00:33:03,982
they decided that it was appropriate to do the last step of this process,

560
00:33:03,982 --> 00:33:07,986
and we’ve talked through it, having decided that ICANN was mature enough

561
00:33:07,986 --> 00:33:10,989
and was internationally acceptable enough and was internationally strong enough

562
00:33:10,989 --> 00:33:13,992
to handle that final transition.

563
00:33:13,992 --> 00:33:17,996
So, I think they deserve a lot of credit for that.

564
00:33:17,996 --> 00:33:22,000
Earlier administrations had said, basically, this will never happen,

565
00:33:22,000 --> 00:33:25,003
or given the impression that that was the view.

566
00:33:25,003 --> 00:33:28,006
And a lot of people said the U.S. will never give up its

567
00:33:28,006 --> 00:33:33,970
particular relationship to that IANA file. And so I think the community

568
00:33:33,970 --> 00:33:37,974
owes them a vote of thanks and acknowledgement

569
00:33:37,974 --> 00:33:40,977
that there were other options, but I think they chose the right one

570
00:33:40,977 --> 00:33:44,981
and then they stood by it, and they pushed it and they defended it.

571
00:33:44,981 --> 00:33:46,983
Peter Dengate Thrush, you are thanking them,

572
00:33:46,983 --> 00:33:50,987
and I want to thank you for taking the time to talk to us.

573
00:33:50,987 --> 00:33:52,989
Very much appreciated. Thank you, Peter.

574
00:33:52,989 --> 00:33:53,990
Thank you.