[governance] PIR Case/or the .org sell

Sun Dec 1 16:00:26 EST 2019

+1
Thanks, Brett!

2019-12-01 15:57 UTC−05:00, Brett Solomon <brett at accessnow.org>:
> Hi,
>
> I would strongly encourage IGC considers a "stop the sale" approach. Or as
> an alternative, an approach which demands ISOC's full transparency
> (including 1. releasing all board and other documentation on the sale and
> 2. answers to the range of questions listed above), BEFORE any further
> steps are taken to conclude the proposed sale.
>
> My own preference is to be firm, with a statement to 'stop the sale' and at
> the same time demand full transparency of ISOC that lead them to this
> point. Demanding both, to my mind, is the appropriate thing to do at this
> juncture.
>
> I think it's also important that we recognize that the sale *has not yet
> happened*, that ISOC can reverse the decision as requested by its Dutch
> Chapter <https://isoc.nl/nieuws/statement-against-the-sale-of-dot-org/>
> (and
> now supported by the Swiss Chapter), the transaction will not conclude
> until the first quarter of next year
> <https://www.internetsociety.org/news/press-releases/2019/ethos-capital-to-acquire-public-interest-registry-from-the-internet-society/>
> at
> the earliest as ISOC indicated, and that ICANN can terminate any agreement
> <https://www.internetgovernance.org/2019/11/25/what-to-do-about-org/>under
> Article 7.5 of the Registry Agreement. Therefore due diligence questions
> should also be sent to ICANN ahead of any approvals and BEFORE ISOC
> proceeds any further with the sale.
>
> Thanks to all those who have been working on these issues for some time!
>
> Brett
>
> PS Here are the notes
> <https://www.accessnow.org/cms/assets/uploads/2019/11/Save.ORG-Town-Hall-IGF_27-November-2019.pdf>
> from the Public Town Hall at the IGF on Thursday, Access Now's call
> for stopping
> the sale
> <https://www.accessnow.org/access-now-calls-on-icann-and-internet-society-to-halt-the-sale-of-org/>,
> Tim
> Berners Lee's tweet calling the proposed sale a 'travesty
> <https://twitter.com/timberners_lee/status/1199752059534413824>' and news
> that the Girl Scouts <https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50515786> have
> called for the sale to be stopped.
>
> 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 Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 1:59 PM Imran Ahmed Shah
> <governance at lists.riseup.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear(s) Sheetal and All
>>
>> Thanks for summarizing the question to be submitted, I would like to add
>> few comments:
>>
>> 1. Although transparency has been a basic requirement for non-commercial
>> organizations in public interest, however, only questioning about
>> transparency could help in solving the puzzle (what, why, how) but does
>> not
>> solve the matter of selling non-commercial entity to the commercial one.
>> If
>> the ISoc BoT takes a decision on transparency by opening the deal of
>> selling it, how it will solve the issue. Actually, ISOC sold PIR, while
>> every one is discussing the registry .Org managed by PIR. dot ORG Registry
>> encapsulated
>> with in this sale of PIR. I suggest we have to address the matter
>> differently.
>>
>> 2. There had been suggestions from few of the friends for ensuring the
>> Price-cap
>> regulation, how a commercial entity will accept it, or how long
>> non-commercial entity will remain under bindings? How they can leave the
>> competitive market and open competition aside?
>>
>> 3. By the way, current market price of .org domain name is already double
>> of the price of .com, why? has CS taken any action? and why not half
>> instead of double?
>>
>> 4. Price Increase will eliminate many of the public interest activities,
>> "not for profit organizations", "non-commercial entities", "digital
>> presence of work for good reasons".
>>
>> Here, I would like to quote a practical example of the ISOC Pakistan
>> chapter.
>> "ISOC Pakistan chapter blog (its digital presence) was established on
>> Ning
>> (initially free platform), it has been active for years and community
>> members were engaged for IG related discussion (taking advantage of
>> blog).
>> At a stage, Ning suddenly applied few $ fee, in a result the blog was
>> disabled and chapter has no membership records, ISoc removed chapter's
>> membership and finally it is disappeared.
>>
>> 5. ISOC was getting millions from PIR, why it is being sold?
>>
>> 6. In my point of view, .org should remain under the stewardship,
>> control/, administered by non-commercial entities and should have to be
>> operated by not for profit entities.
>>
>> 7. I am afraid of this kind of practice, "the encapsulated sale of TLD's
>> Registry". Think.... if the same practice is exercised by the other
>> "Public
>> Interest and community related" s/g/TLD's Registry Owners.... In 2009, I
>> have said in ICANN;s Public Forum (Seoul Meeting) that their action will
>> be
>> starting a big Gambling Game.
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Imran Ahmed Shah
>>
>> Consultant/ Advisor
>> TLDians.Org
>> Urdu Internet Council
>>
>> On Sunday, 1 December 2019, 21:44:39 GMT+5, Sheetal Kumar <
>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear Ayden, all,
>>
>> Thanks for your responses! It seems to me that if we're going to agree on
>> anything, it's the lack of transparency that we can agree needs to be
>> rectified. I've slightly reworded the below in light of the recent
>> suggestions and remarks.
>>
>> What do others think about Sylvain's suggestions of asking about setting
>> up a commons PIR (is this possible/feasible?) and of sending this also to
>> ISOC's BoT and CEO? Do you have any others?
>>
>>
>> *As members of a network which encompasses many non-commercial
>> organisations, we are concerned about the lack of transparency regarding
>> the sale of .ORG. When the board discusses the sale of .org, we request
>> that these questions are considered in the due diligence process:   *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *- What does the Board intend to do in order to protect the existing
>> millions of .ORG registrants?- After the changes to the .ORG contract to
>> preserve existing rights of .ORG registrants, how else does the Board
>> intend to ensure the sale of PIR (this new steward of .org) will act on
>> behalf of the public interest and the world community of noncommercial,
>> civil society groups in the world?- What are ICANN's obligation to
>> protect
>> those organizations engaged in missions of "public interest around the
>> world?" - How does the Board respond to allegations/concerns regarding
>> possible conflict of interest in transference of stewardship to Ethos
>> capital?*
>>
>>
>> *We request answers to these questions in the spirit of building trust
>> among NGOs and the non-commercial constituency more generally and those
>> who
>> play a key role in stewarding the Internet.*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 30 Nov 2019 at 17:58, Ayden Férdeline <ayden at ferdeline.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> While I agree these are questions for the ISOC Board of Trustees, I
>> believe they are *also* questions for the ICANN Board. I expect that the
>> ICANN Board will not respond to them, but I think they could - and should
>> -
>> and I encourage us to place pressure on both parties to take these
>> questions and the sentiments behind them seriously.
>>
>> ICANN, in particular, does need to address at least the perception that
>> there is a revolving door of insiders who are behind this and other
>> deals.
>> And ISOC needs to be more transparent about what due diligence it did
>> before entering into the arrangement to sell PIR, and what mechanisms it
>> has put in place (if any) to protect .ORG, .NGO, and .ONG registrants.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline
>>
>>
>>
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>> On Saturday, 30 November 2019 13:34, James Gannon
>> <james at cyberinvasion.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> These are questions for the ISOC Board not the ICANN board.
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 30 Nov 2019, at 13:09, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Dear all,
>>
>> What do people think about sending a letter to the ICANN Board with a
>> series of questions in order to get more transparency? Bruna and I
>> discussed this, and chatted to others, and are wondering what you think
>> of
>> this approach. As the Board will meet and discuss the sale as part of a
>> due
>> diligence process, we thought it might be a constructive approach to
>> request they consider and answer certain questions.
>>
>> It would be great to hear your views on this approach and on the
>> questions. See below:
>>
>> *When the board discusses the sale of .org, we request that these
>> questions are considered in the due diligence process:   *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *- What does the Board intend to do in order to protect the existing
>> millions of .ORG registrants? - After the changes to the .ORG contract to
>> preserve existing rights of .ORG registrants, how else does the Board
>> intend to ensure the sale of PIR (this new steward of .org) will act on
>> behalf of the public interest and the world community of noncommercial,
>> civil society groups in the world? - What's ICANN's obligation to protect
>> those organizations engaged in missions of "public interest around the
>> world?" - How does the Board respond to allegations/concerns regarding
>> possible conflict of interest in transference of stewardship to Ethos
>> capital*
>>
>> Best
>> Sheetal
>>
>> On Fri, 29 Nov 2019 at 02:36, Sylvain Baya <governance at lists.riseup.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Le jeudi 28 novembre 2019, Bill Woodcock <woody at pch.net> a écrit :
>>
>> > they can (even without sourcing their affirmation) then note that the
>> > minority of *non-commercial* [1] Internet Community is about to be
>> *eliminated* by their
>> > 'well intended' *big deal*.
>> >
>> > Why ?
>> > ...i guess that 1% of 10M (domain names) +=> the non-commercial [1]
>> world is under
>> > the pressure of commercial world in the Internet, even in .ORG
>> registrations they are
>> > still oppressed by 99% of 10M
>>
>> None of the above parses.  Please try again, with simpler construction.
>> You can break it out into as many sentences as you like, but please try
>> to
>> make each one encapsulate exactly one thought.  Else nobody is going to
>> be
>> able to engage in a constructive conversation with you.
>>
>>
>> ...what's the point please, dear Bill ?
>> Do you really want to convince me without argumenting ?
>>
>> Shalom,
>> --sb.
>>
>>
>>
>>                                 -Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards !
>> baya.sylvain [AT cmNOG DOT cm] | <https://www.cmnog.cm> | <
>> https://survey.cmnog.cm>
>> Subscribe to Mailing List : <
>> https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/>
>> __
>> #‎LASAINTEBIBLE‬|‪#‎Romains15‬:33«*Que LE ‪#‎DIEU‬ de ‪#‎Paix‬ soit avec
>> vous tous! ‪#‎Amen‬!*»
>> ‪#‎MaPrière‬ est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chrétiennement‬
>> «*Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi mon âme soupire
>> après TOI, ô DIEU!*» (#Psaumes42:2)
>>
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Sheetal Kumar*
>> Senior Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>>
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> *Sheetal Kumar*
>> Senior Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>>
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
>

-- 
------------------------
**Arsène Tungali* <http://about.me/ArseneTungali>*
Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international
<http://www.rudiinternational.org>*,
CEO,* Smart Services Sarl <https://www.smart-kitoko.com/>*,
Tel: +243 993810967 (DRC)
GPG: 523644A0

2015 Mandela Washington Fellow
<
http://tungali.blogspot.com/2015/06/selected-for-2015-mandela-washington.html>

(YALI) - ICANN GNSO Council Member
<https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/gnso-council.htm> Member. UN IGF MAG
<https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/pi2247.doc.htm> Member