[governance] Latest developments regarding the sale of .ORG

[Ayden Férdeline]

Dear all,

Here are some new developments regarding the proposed sale of .ORG:

new press release from Mozilla, directed towards the ICANN Board of Directors

https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2020/01/23/icann-directors-take-a-close-look-at-the-dot-org-sale/

ICANN directors should also discuss whether alternatives to the current sale should be considered, including an open call for bidders. Internet stalwarts like Wikimedia, experts like Marietje Schaake and dozens of important non-profits have proposed other options, including the creation of a co-op of dot orgs. In a Washington Post op-ed, former ICANN chair Esther Dyson argues that such a co-op would “[keep] dot-org safe, secure and free of any motivation to profit off its users’ data or to upsell them pricy add-ons.”

The Economist publishes an editorial on .ORG sale

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2020/01/25/a-proposed-sale-of-rights-to-org-web-addresses-sparks-a-backlash

ICANN argues that its remit is narrow—not to approve the sale per se, but to give its consent to the change of control of .org from ISOC to Ethos. Yet that change would represent something much broader: a shift away from the internet’s non-commercial roots.

ABC News reports from Davos on the sale

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/coalition-ngos-battling-private-equity-firm-buy-org/story?id=68449350

Some of the world's biggest nonprofit organizations are banding together to fight the purchase of the ".org" internet address by a private equity firm, calling management of the domain a "human rights and social justice issue."

Domain Name Wire piece on how ISOC spends its funds

https://domainnamewire.com/2020/01/22/guest-editorial-isoc/#more-63021

"While ISOC’s stated mission is to promote the Internet “for the benefit of all people throughout the world”,[44] much of the $70 million extracted by ISOC is skimmed from the charitable contributions intended for nonprofits working to address pressing global social needs – hunger, disease, climate change, homelessness, intolerance, the refugee crisis, among countless other worthwhile missions, as well as from the tithes and other donations made to religious institutions and local houses of worship."

Washington Post editorial board publishes piece on the sale

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-end-of-dot-org-as-we-know-it-feels-a-lot-like-giving-up/2020/01/22/49d0fb30-37c3-11ea-bb7b-265f4554af6d_story.html

This is a story of corporate squabbling, but it’s also a story of squabbling over the reality that the Internet has become corporate. Ethos makes the point that the Web is evolving and dot-org needs to evolve with it. More money for the registry means more ability to innovate and to lure in additional registrants with those innovations that will, in turn, produce more money. This is a virtuous cycle for any good capitalist, but it looks like a vicious one to many Internet pioneers who envisioned a space that liberated its occupants from the mundane commercialism of everyday life — and who bemoan that it has instead become its own “industrial complex.”

Two NPR shows cover the controversy, in different ways

Marketwatch is joined by Internet pioneer Andrew McLaughlin:
https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace-tech/why-nonprofits-are-wary-about-a-private-firm-buying-the-dot-org-domain/

OnPoint is joined by Internet pioneer Esther Dyson and the ISOC CEO:
https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2020/01/21/nonprofits-beware-your-org-address-could-soon-belong-to-a-for-profit-company

A third petition has been launched and has attracted 8,000 signatures

This is in addition to the #SaveDotOrg campaign, whose petition already has 22,000 signatures:

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/stop-the-desecration-of-the-orgs

More than 10 million organization websites are threatened by a greedy private equity firm.

If Ethos takes charge of the .ORGs, any number of terrible things could happen:

They would have access to the registration information for all organizations with a .ORG website. Ethos could sell this information to authoritarian states that want to silence dissent, or to groups that want to stop certain human rights efforts, putting these organizations and the people behind them in danger.

They could raise the price of registering a domain, which might make it hard for some nonprofits to establish their online presence, or for other organizations to maintain their current website. Through this they could silence voices and perspectives.

They could censor groups by booting them off their domain—or even shut down all .ORG websites entirely.  They could start selling off .ORG web domains to anyone who wants them, without regard for the intended meaning of the domain.

Private equity firms only exist to make money, so we can be certain that Ethos will do whatever it can to maximize profits, at the expense of nonprofits that are trying to do good in the world.  In a world where a majority of the Internet is controlled by a few big companies, the .ORG domain should be protected from money-hungry interests. We must protect this space on the Internet where decisions are made in the interest of the greater good.

Finally, tomorrow there is a protest in Los Angeles

https://savedotorg.org/index.php/savedotorg-protest-at-icann/

-- Ayden Férdeline
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20200123/4138e8e2/attachment.htm>