[governance] PIR and ETHOS Convene Community Webinar on 12/19

Wed Dec 18 06:51:05 EST 2019

> If those demands are met, via amendments to the Registry Agreement, it doesn’t matter whether Ethos Capital or anyone else owns ORG.

Yes, it does matter who owns and controls .ORG.

If the price of a .ORG domain increases under the ownership of Ethos Capital, that is a diversion of public interest money away from the non-profit community and into the hands of investment vehicles that are controlled by billionaires.

> We will be protected. Let’s not foster outrage for its own sake, let’s get something done!

I agree that registrant protections are important and I too would like to see these protections inserted into the Registry Agreement.

But I do not agree with your characterisation of opposition to the sale of PIR to Ethos Capital as "outrage for its own sake".

Ayden Férdeline

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Tuesday, December 17, 2019 10:39 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:

> Brett, and all others interested in the ORG sale.
>
> As I  have been saying since the Berlin IGF, making noise about the sale and demanding nothing except “stop the sale” does nothing for ORG registrants.
>
> In this letter to the ICANN board, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zfaTlkIUZEsNMOQljy43SQSXZUQBmgFSJYVnjGgpYp8/edit
>
> the ICANN’s Noncommercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG) set out a specific set of demands grounded in ICANN process and ORG’s original RFP. If those demands are met, via amendments to the Registry Agreement, it doesn’t matter whether Ethos Capital or anyone else owns ORG. We will be protected. Let’s not foster outrage for its own sake, let’s get something done!
>
> The obvious flaw in the “stop the sale” emphasis that is being peddled here is that if you are successful, what do we have? We have no price caps, no content neutrality protections, no removal of the URS from ORG, and an entity running org that would prefer not to. That’s what you are proposing. Does it sound desirable?
>
> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>
> School of Public Policy
>
> [IGP_logo_gold block]
>
> From: governance-request at lists.riseup.net <governance-request at lists.riseup.net> On Behalf Of Brett Solomon
> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 11:28 AM
> To: Ayden Férdeline <ayden at ferdeline.com>
> Cc: george.sadowsky at gmail.com; governance <governance at lists.riseup.net>
> Subject: Re: [governance] PIR and ETHOS Convene Community Webinar on 12/19
>
> George et al,
>
> I started this email a few days back and it was in my inbox but I wanted to send it even though this is an old thread.
>
> I agree ISOC is an important and valued organization. One that many of us partner with, have trusted over numerous years and have respected for its contribution. However you conclusions are very far from where I sit. In fact I contend the opposite:
>
> The future of ISOC depends not on selling PIR but on maintaining it - this sorry episode has so significantly damaged ISOC's reputation, that the worst thing it could do now is to proceed. It should reverse its decision, rebuild trust with the community and continue to implement its mission.
>
> You say - The eventual disposition of PIR should not be our primary concern, rather it should be ensuring that the goals of ISOC that we share with them should be furthered in the most effective manner possible. I think that the future of PIR should be our primary concern, and a side product of protecting it and .ORG, is to ensure the future of ISOC.
>
> A sale will result in the destabilization of .ORG and the 10 million registrants and risks destroying ISOC in the process.
>
> Brett
>
> Brett Solomon
> Executive Director
> Access Now | accessnow.org
>
> @solomonbrett
>
> Key ID: 0x4EDC17EB
> Fingerprint: C02C A886 B0FC 3A25 FF9F ECE8 FCDF BA23 4EDC 17EB
>
> *Subscribe to the [Access Now Express](https://www.accessnow.org/campaign/#sign-up), our weekly newsletter on digital rights
>
> *Protect digital rights around the world - [support Access Now](https://act.accessnow.org/page/13742/donate/1) with a donation today
>
> Brett Solomon
> Executive Director
> Access Now | accessnow.org
>
> @solomonbrett
>
> Key ID: 0x4EDC17EB
> Fingerprint: C02C A886 B0FC 3A25 FF9F ECE8 FCDF BA23 4EDC 17EB
>
> *Subscribe to the [Access Now Express](https://www.accessnow.org/campaign/#sign-up), our weekly newsletter on digital rights
>
> *Protect digital rights around the world - [support Access Now](https://act.accessnow.org/page/13742/donate/1) with a donation today
>
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 2:50 PM Ayden Férdeline <ayden at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> I am afraid I don't share your optimism. But I appreciate the attempt at moving us forward to somewhere a little less combative.
>>
>> I think this webinar is premature. Yes, it is helpful to have more of a dialogue with Ethos Capital. But unless they are coming forward with actual plans - not hypotheticals, not ideas, not 'listening' for feedback - this webinar will just be another hour of uncertainty. What we need now is real information. We need to know what legal entity PIR will be becoming, what it's bylaws will say, what it's business model is, what the pitch to investors was. We don't want nor can we accept more open-ended statements or breakable promises.
>>
>> If, as a show of good faith, Ethos does start disclosing that information, then I agree we might be able to move forward and discuss the role of this advisory council. But absent this information, being well-intentioned isn't enough. When we're dealing with a newly-created shell company, we need real assurances for the future.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ayden Férdeline
>>
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>
>> On Friday, December 13, 2019 5:28 AM, George Sadowsky <governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The announcement of this Webinar is a very promising development.
>>>
>>> Perhaps the most prevalent constant in this debate has been secrecy, or lack of information, subjecting the discussion to an enormous stream of hypotheticals.   Ethos has been the most secretive to date, and now it appears that next week they are planning to discuss their plans for .org.  I'm not sure what they will say, but I think that they deserve an equal opportunity to be heard.  What they say will help to inform the discussion.
>>>
>>> Sometimes in the heat of the moment we get wrapped up in an issue which, while important, is dwarfed by others that are forgotten in the battle.  This may be one of those moments.
>>>
>>> Yesterday ISOC had a 90 minute webinar in which staff discussed their programmatic plans for the future.   I was very impressed with the presenters, with the programmatic thrusts being planned and executed, and with their willingness to be open with regard to how the plan was formed  --  in this case, with significant input from our community.  When being involved in the PIR debate, it's easy to forget that ISOC is an institution whose goals we share, that has done an enormous amount of good work in the past, and who seems dedicated to continue their efforts unabated  into the future.   ISOC is an enormous asset to the open Internet and to the Internet community.
>>>
>>> Like some of you, I felt a disappointment in the way in which the PIR decision was handled, and assuming at portfolio diversification was the goal, I believe that it could have been better achieved in a different manner.  But I would much rather accept and live with that disappointment and see ISOC succeed, than see ISOC robbed of any opportunity to continue its work effectively due to the lack of closure of the PIR debate.
>>>
>>> No matter how the PIR issue is resolved, we must come out of this process, and soon, with an ISOC that is whole, able to do its work and able to command the voluntary cooperation and affiliation and enthusiasm of a strong membership.
>>>
>>> The eventual disposition of PIR should not be our primary concern, rather it should be ensuring that the goals of ISOC that we share with them should be furthered in the most effective manner possible.  Let's remember that in the course of this discussion and not make it more difficult to achieve the real goal.
>>>
>>> George
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> George Sadowsky                                    Residence tel: +1.301.968.4325
>>>
>>> 8300 Burdette Road, Apt B-472                          Mobile: +1.202.415.1933
>>>
>>> Bethesda MD  20817-2831  USA                                    Skype: sadowsky
>>>
>>> george.sadowsky at gmail.com                http://www.georgesadowsky.org/
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20191218/b0671e59/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 19668 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20191218/b0671e59/attachment.png>