It is highly likely that ICANN will disregard the decision made by Namecheap's Independent Review Process (IRP), which removed the price caps for .ORG and .INFO domain names. ICANN's comments about the IRP decision clearly indicate this.



ICANN does not appear to have any regard for anyone, including the global public interest and even the IRP arbitrators, and they will most likely twist the decision to suit their own agenda without addressing any of the violations. The extent of their corruption is alarming.

It is curious that Göran Marby left his position as ICANN President and CEO merely five days prior to the IRP decision. ICANN announced that they had received the final declaration from the three-member panel of neutral arbitrators regarding Namecheap, Inc.'s challenge of the 2019 Registry Agreements for .BIZ, .INFO, and .ORG, and ICANN's consideration of Public Interest Registry's request for a change of control.

The IRP panel agreed with ICANN that the removal of the price controls did not constitute discriminatory treatment under the Bylaws. However, the panel also found that ICANN's authorization of the 2019 Registry Agreements for .INFO and .ORG without price controls breached Articles and/or Bylaws in several ways. ICANN was insufficiently transparent during the decision-making process, the Board failed to make proper decisions regarding these Registry Agreement renewals, and ICANN did not follow the necessary procedures for promoting the global public interest.

Although the panel regarded these violations as procedural rather than substantive, they recommended that ICANN analyze and discuss how to address the specific breaches and improve their decision-making process, to prevent similar violations from recurring in the future. Alternatively, Namecheap implored the panel to order ICANN to re-impose price controls in the .BIZ, .INFO, and .ORG Registry Agreements. The panel did not do so, citing a "clear distinction" between their power to "declare" and recommend and the lack of remit for such an "order."

ICANN is presently reviewing and evaluating the final declaration and plans to consider it within the timeframe outlined in the Bylaws.

The recent events surrounding ICANN and the Namecheap IRP decision raise profound questions about the nature of power, governance, and ethical responsibility in the digital age.

The issue of corruption within ICANN forces us to reconsider the moral foundations of global internet governance. It prompts us to reflect on the inherent tensions between centralized authority and decentralized participation in shaping the digital infrastructure that underpins our modern society.

The Namecheap IRP decision serves as a philosophical case study in the complexities of accountability and transparency within large-scale organizations that wield significant influence over the technological landscape. It compels us to examine the ethical implications of unchecked power and the potential consequences for the fundamental principles of fairness and integrity in the management of global digital resources.

I am drawn to the deeper implications of these events, delving into questions of justice, legitimacy, and the moral obligations of those entrusted with overseeing essential aspects of our interconnected world. This situation calls for a critical examination of the ethical frameworks that guide our interactions in cyberspace and the fundamental values that should inform the governance of the internet.

The Namecheap IRP decision, when viewed through a philosophical lens, challenges us to contemplate the evolving nature of authority, responsibility, and moral agency in the digital domain. It invites us to engage in a thoughtful exploration of the ethical dimensions of internet governance and the enduring quest for a harmonious and just global digital ecosystem.