EU may push Microsoft to bundle competing web browsers

The European Union has been decrying Microsoft anti-competitive practices for some time now, but the situation might be headed for more volatile waters. For over a decade, Microsoft has been bundling its web browser, Internet Explorer, with every copy it sells of Microsoft Windows. In 1998, the United States filed antitrust suits against Microsoft for giving itself an unfair advantage over competing browsers, such as Netscape Navigator.

In the U.S. case, the court settled, allowing Microsoft to continue integrating IE into its operating system while providing competitors with the API. What resulted was a decade of poorly developed websites catered to Internet Explorer’s failure to adhere to web standards. The EU seems poised to avoid a similar mistake and may insist that Microsoft bundle competing browsers, of which there are many more than there were in 1998.

In 2004, the EU tried to get Microsoft to unbundle Windows Media Player from Windows, issuing fines in the tens of millions of dollars, but the corporation did not budge. The latest incarnation of the OS, Windows 7, gives users the ability to disable Internet Explorer and other built-in applications. They may see this as an effort to silence EU complaints.

Source: ChannelWeb
Photo: Flickr

CEO: ICANN should be independent

In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, ICANN CEO, Paul Twomey has responded to last week’s calls by EU commissioner Viviane Reding to turn over ICANN to a 12-body international coalition (dubbed the G12).

Twomey agrees with Reding’s belief that the United States Department of Commerce should release ICANN, but he believes that the organization is ready to stand on its own.

Among the larger changes that Twomey expects to come are: international top-level domain names in various languages other than English and generic Top Level Domains (gTLD) such as “dot berlin”, “dot paris”, and “dot london”.

Twomey also explains in the interview that there are approximately 170 million domain names in the world, half of which are country codes (such as .us, .uk, etc.) 80 million of those domains are “Dot com”.

“There’s also a group of people who are applying for community-based, top-level domains like the geographical or ethnic communities or associations. For instance, “dot coop” is a top-level domain with about 8,000 registrations that have been in place for eight or nine years, and I understand they’re quite pumped. They don’t need to have 8 million, only 8,000.”

Twomey also talked about the concern over the status of the domain name industry during the economic recession.

“There was an expectation that the top-level domain space would go flat and the country codes would keep increasing. From what I’ve heard, generic top-level domains have not gone flat, at least not so far this year. They continue to grow.”

Source: San Francisco Chronicle
Photo: Flickr

Who Should Control ICANN and the Internet?

In her weekly video message posted today, Viviane Reding, the European Union Commissioner for Information Society and Media, discussed the future of the Internet and ICANN.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN, is a private non-profit created more than a decade ago in the United States to handle issues concerning domain names. It is mainly responsible for approving new top-level domains and regulating domain registrars.

Currently, ICANN has an exclusive agreement with the US government in which the organization falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce. This agreement expires on September 30, however, and Reding wants ICANN to be fully privated.

A moment of truth will come on 30 September this year, when the current agreement between ICANN and the US Government expires. This opens the door for the full privatisation of ICANN.

Though she believes ICANN has gone a good job administrating the web, Reding wants to see more international involvement and less control from the United States. Specifically, she wants ICANN to be held accountable to an international tribunal where domain name disputes between third parties could be resolved. Considering the multilateral nature of the Internet, is it fair for one country to have control over it?
Read More >>