At 15:50 12/06/2012, Marc Perkel wrote:
>http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/12/12172042-is-flame-virus-fallout-a-chinese-russian-plot-to-control-the-internet?lite
>
>Not the best article but United States abuse of the Internet by 
>creating super viruses could lead to ICANN losing control. I 
>personally think Flame and Stuxnet will end up being a huge mistake.

Marc,

do not worry. The ICANN has absolutely no control on the Internet. It 
plaid the role that at the end of the day everyone accepted it to 
play. Then the took seriously their IANA maintenance task and wanted 
to take control of it (Paul Towmey and Chris Dispain and the mad vTLD 
scheme) and make it endorsed by the USG as a lesser evil. I am afraid 
this may come to an end soon enough with the fist court actions over 
the vTLD IPR issue.

You know, there is no virus that can affect the internet, but there 
is a IANA DoS bomb  (the langtag registry, due to it size and lack 
of  update  solution) by the US  Industry. The Internet architecture 
surprisingly turns out to be extremely robust and open, but it is 
under employed to the advantage of its current dominance. The real 
issue is the USB (US Bluff): as long as it stays accepted, it 
protects us with the US umbrella of stability, what is acceptable to 
everyone - except in case of cyberwarfare actions. This is why the 
vTLD project was absurd: because it will start an intra-US legal loss 
of ICANN credibility, and as a consequence will question the USB. 
This will lead to the "internet+", with the same inner protocol, cute 
external additions and an entire new governance. Lead by Google/ISOC 
instead of ICANN/ISOC, at least they will have a try at it: decision 
will be with the users. Who do they want to control them?

Cheers !
jfc