When governments shut off the internet or silence their own citizens, the damage does not stop at borders. VPN.com Domain Advisor CEO Michael Gargiulo says global internet governance should not look the other way.
In a pointed call to action, Gargiulo is urging the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to review how country code top-level domains, known as ccTLDs, are handled when governments coordinate censorship or are linked to civilian casualties.
The message is direct. Access to the global internet carries responsibility. When that responsibility is abused, consequences should follow.
Why ccTLD Policy Is Back in the Spotlight
Country code top-level domains are the digital identifiers assigned to nations. Examples include .ru for Russia and .ir for Iran. These domains sit inside the Domain Name System (DNS), which functions as the internet’s addressing layer.
Without DNS, websites do not resolve. Email does not flow. Commerce slows to a crawl.
Gargiulo argues that this leverage is ignored, even as governments deploy internet shutdowns during protests, elections, or armed conflict.
“ICANN has a unique responsibility in shaping global internet policy,” Gargiulo said. “That responsibility should account for government-coordinated censorship and violence against civilians. When countries restrict their people’s access to the internet, their participation in the global DNS deserves review.”
A Tiered Accountability Model for ccTLDs
The proposal does not call for blanket punishment or impulsive action. It outlines a tiered framework tied to measurable behavior.
Trigger Events That Demand Review
Under Gargiulo’s recommendation, two primary actions would initiate scrutiny.
First, coordinated government actions that result in civilian death tolls beyond a defined threshold.
Second, widespread or repeated internet shutdowns that block citizens from accessing the open web.
Either action could prompt temporary suspension or removal of a ccTLD from the DNS root zone.
The emphasis is on structure, not chaos. Clear thresholds. Clear consequences.
Economic Pressure Without Military Force
Gargiulo frames ccTLDs as economic infrastructure, not symbolic assets.
Domains power e-commerce. Domains support exports. Domains help governments collect revenue from registries and registrars.
When a country benefits from global digital systems while suppressing its population, Gargiulo sees a contradiction.
“This is not about harming citizens,” he said. “It is about promoting peace through economic signals. ccTLDs are part of the digital economy. If a government blocks access or commits large-scale abuses, it should not keep full access to that system.”
Examples That Raise Hard Questions
Several sanctioned or isolated countries continue operating ccTLDs without interruption.
Russia’s .ru supports millions of domains. Iran’s .ir hosts well over a million. Venezuela’s .ve and North Korea’s .kp remain active, even as international pressure mounts in other areas.
Gargiulo points out that financial systems face sanctions. Travel faces restrictions. Digital infrastructure rarely does.
That gap, he argues, weakens diplomatic leverage.
ICANN’s Role in Global Internet Stewardship
ICANN positions itself as a technical coordinator, not a political actor. Gargiulo does not dispute that mission.
He questions whether technical neutrality should ignore clear patterns of harm.
Domain policy already reflects values. Rules exist for stability, abuse prevention, and operator conduct. Extending those principles to extreme censorship and violence follows the same logic.
The difference is scale.
VPN.com’s Broader Position on Domain Governance
Gargiulo has built a public record at the intersection of domains, internet access, and global markets. His commentary has appeared in Entrepreneur and Forbes, where he has pressed for stronger leadership in domain policy.
Alongside Sharjil Saleem, Gargiulo leads the VPN.com Premium Domain Broker team, known for investing seven figures into their own domain name. The move was not a stunt. It was a statement about belief in digital assets as long-term economic instruments.
That same belief informs his stance on ccTLD accountability.
Digital infrastructure shapes behavior. It rewards choices. It signals boundaries.
Ignoring that reality does not preserve neutrality. It preserves the status quo.
As debates over censorship, sovereignty, and online access intensify, Gargiulo’s proposal adds an uncomfortable but timely question to the table: if the internet is global, should accountability be optional?