What Will Internet Governance Look Like?

With the recent discussions around Internet governance within the US legislature and the UN, it is clear that the method of governing the Internet will soon be defined.

Given the occurrences of cyber bullying, cross border attacks against Internet properties, online fraud, and even hacktivism, I do believe that some sort of governance is necessary. We are a long way from creating that kind of governance, but the best way to make this proposed governance body successful will be to think outside the box.

To analyze where we should end up, I’ve put together a list of qualities the Internet governance body, policies, or procedures should have to be effective. Basically, I think the body, policies, procedures, etc. should have the same characteristics as the Internet.

1. They must be agile. Policy issues associated with electronic mediums arise and change with incredible velocity and momentum. It is critical that the governance of these issues be able to adapt as quickly. Current legislative and ICANN procedures take years too long to be meaningful.
2. They must be multi-national. The Internet spans all countries, cultures, and legal systems. Governing this body will require a way to accommodate all of these different mores and values.
3. They must be scalable. The Internet is growing at an immeasurable rate. Policies, procedures, etc. must be able to accommodate this growth.

Other things I’ve considered:

1. They should be flexible. The biggest risk I’ve seen with Internet governance is that there will be unintended ramifications of various policy enactments. I look at this much like I look at my company: you have to be willing to take risks and you have to be able to quickly clean up any problems that arise from misguided decisions.
2. They must be relevant. This sounds obvious, but giving a brick and mortar entity (a police department, for example) jurisdiction over an electronic body would not be efficient.

One question – what else should go on these lists of must haves and things to be considered?

Given the above items, what would a governance body look like? My current thought is that the Internet should be self policing. A self-policing entity would address all of my must-haves and at least the relevant component of my nice-to-haves. Can we look at the successful self-policing models (electronic and otherwise) and use these to model what a governance body for the Internet should be?