InfoWorld

[Commentary] Much of the reaction against the US Commerce Department's decision to let its contract with Internet governance organization ICANN (Internet Corporate for Assigned Names and Numbers) lapse in September 2015 has been decidedly bellicose and over the top.

Fox News accused President Barack Obama of giving away the Internet, the Wall Street Journal's headline announced "America's Internet Surrender," and former House speaker Newt Gingrich tweeted that "Every American should worry about Obama giving up control of the Internet to an undefined group. This is very, very dangerous."

While the WSJ might rail against "the surprise announcement," the US government's role in coordinating the Internet's domain name system through the NTIA, an agency of the Commerce Department, was always temporary. Indeed, this transition was long overdue in the eyes of many, who say US involvement created political friction and hindered ICANN's development.

As ICANN's board chair Stephen Crocker said, "The US has long envisioned the day when stewardship over [domain names] would be transitioned to the global community. In other words, we have all long known the destination. Now it is up to our global stakeholder community to determine the best route to get us there."

Let's quiet the hysteria, drop the hyperbole, and figure out how to make this thing work. As Politico said, "This announcement definitely doesn't reflect a global takeover. UN black helicopters aren't coming for your servers.... [This is a] smart, strategic move by Commerce to formalize, on its own terms, a process of increased globalization that has been going on for some time."