Government involvement in ccTLD administration


Version 1.0, 2002-03-26, 50 entries
(See also the detailed ccTLD review)
Send updates to <ant at internet dot org dot za>

ccTLD Country Does government support the current ccTLD admin? How involved is government in the administration? Legislation? Type of administration ICANN Contract?
ac Ascension Island Yes Private company No
ad Andorra Yes Local WIPO Member No
ar Argentia Yes No
at Austria Yes Advisory role None Charitable trust (1998-)
Academia (-1998)
No
au Australia Yes Advisory role Government has ultimate authority Non-for profit company (2001-) Yes
be Belgium Foundation No
ch Switzerland Yes Function delegated to SWITCH via contract and decree Government has ultimate authority Foundation No
cn China Yes Function entrusted to CNNIC by the government Non-profit organisation (1997-) No
co Colombia Government report No
cu Cuba Yes No
cx Christmas Islands Yes Government has ultimate authority No
cz Czech Republic None Association of ISPs No
de Germany Regular talks None Private Company Cooperative No
dk Denmark Charitable trust No
es Spain Yes Direct Yes Private Company held by Government No
fi Finland Yes Direct Yes, detailing the operation of ccTLD Government body (1997-)
Private company (-1997)
No
fr France Yes Non-profit making organisation (1997-) No
gm The Gambia No None None No
gs South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands None No
gr Greece Yes Association No
gt Guatemala Failed attempt to take over in 2000 No
ht Croatia/Hrvatska Government Agency No
hu Hungary Association No
id Indonesia Talks are underway None No
ie Ireland None Government has ultimate authority Not-for-profit organisation (currenly)
Academia (previously)
No
il Israel Yes None None Association No
it Italy Academia No
jp Japan Yes Association? Yes
ke Kenya Ongoing discussions None Not-for-profit organisation forming No
lb Lebanon None None No
li Liechtenstein Academia (1993-) No
lt Lithuania None None No
ms Montserrat None None No
mx Mexico Yes Formally recognises NIC.MX Congressional discussion was held No
nl Netherlands Foundation No
no Norway Yes Government owned company No
nz New Zealand Yes None None No
pe Peru Nationalisation legislation enacted and later withdrawn No
pg Papua New Guinea  Kept informed of developments None Academia No
ph Philippines None Must be run for the public benefit No
pt Portugal Yes Foundation No
ro Romania Academia No
ru Russia Non-profit organisation No
se Sweden None Proposal to have a signed agreement with .se dropped Chartiable trust No
si Slovakia National Regulatory Authority (currently?)
Academia (previously)
No
ua Ukraine None None Private company No
uk United Kingdom Yes Regular contact None Not-for-profit private company No
uy Uruguay None None No
vg Virgin Islands (British) None None No
vu Vanuatu None None No