<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">In general, I agree that the NCSG must formalize the concerns and submit it to the board if nothing else to get a response. Full disclosure, I'm the owner of an active B-Corporation with a .org domain (<a href="http://soylentnews.org">soylentnews.org</a>)</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 5:33 PM Mueller, Milton L <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div class="gmail-m_4623646125027566056WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">This is not a dramatic change in the entire DNS industry. Operationally and price-wise, PIR was not much different from any other registry. Only difference was
its small annual donation to NCUC and its rather toothless Advisory Committee.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm less concerned on the actual operator of the .org domain as what this represents in the bigger picture. In a timeframe of months, we've seen price caps removed from the .org domain with community input either rejected or ignored, followed by the news of the transfer of the .org domain. To be frank, as long as rules and regulations protected .org, the actual operater is in effect irrelevant. I would prefer it remain with a not-for-profit with an organization that has a history of representing NFPs and similar the best, but at the end of the day the registrar contracts and polices relating to the .org domain is what actually matters. As the letter notes, Verisign originally operated .org and under that period, it still fulfilled its role as a home for not for profits and other organizations due to the contracts and rules attached to .org.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div class="gmail-m_4623646125027566056WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> <u></u>
<u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">As I’ve said numerous times before, what we need out of this controversy is better protection for .Org registrants: longer term registrations, no URS, content
neutrality. We are not going to get that if we keep misdirecting civil society’s efforts towards “stopping the sale,” based on the pretense we can turn the clock back to 2018 and pretend this never happened. And in case you hadn’t noticed, the status quo ante
was not that great, anyway.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>More or less agreed. The problem is the larger context of what's happening, not that the sale is happening. If ISOC divested .org without the lifting of the price caps, I suspect in general the news would be a little more than a footnote. </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div class="gmail-m_4623646125027566056WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">By the same token it would be a travesty if NCSG were unable to get its act together to submit a unified letter to ICANN’s CEO and board regarding what we want
them to do. So it looks like I will have to develop an alternative draft and I hope our leadership in the PC can pull things together in time.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Can you outline what you intend to put in this letter vs. the existing one purposed Ayden. While I fully agree that we need to send a unified letter to the CEO/board, I'm concerned that an entirely new letter will simply serve to split the community.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div class="gmail-m_4623646125027566056WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Watch for it.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div class="gmail-m_4623646125027566056WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> NCSG-Discuss <<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Ayden Férdeline<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 7, 2019 2:56 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [proposed letter] NCSG Concerns About the Sale of the Public Interest Registry to Ethos Capital<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It’s seems to me that this is not only a company sales! It’s a dramatic change in the domain names area and in the field of registrars where Icann has a lot to say <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I agree, Carlos. Thanks for weighing in.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I worry that the sale of PIR to a private entity investment firm will significantly alter the Domain Name System for the worse. We were lucky to have PIR as a non-commercial registry operator serving as a counterbalance against purely commercial
ones. PIR ran .ORG, .NGO, and .ONG for the benefit of registrants and non-commercial users of the DNS, whereas other top-level domains are run by private companies with purely financial objectives. While the interests of companies and users do at times overlap,
they can also conflict, and when this occurs there are significant human rights implications
<a href="http://eff.org/deeplinks/2019/12/we-need-save-org-%E2%80%A6" title="http://eff.org/deeplinks/2019/12/we-need-save-org-%E2%80%A6" target="_blank">
as EFF has outlined</a>. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Best wishes,<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ayden Férdeline <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Saturday, December 7, 2019 3:17 PM, Carlos Vera <<a href="mailto:cveraq@GMAIL.COM" target="_blank">cveraq@GMAIL.COM</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It’s seems to me that this is not only a company sales! It’s a dramatic change in the domain names area and in the field of registrars where Icann has a lot to say <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Carlos Vera<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">isoc Ecuador<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">El 6 dic. 2019, a la(s) 20:58, James Gannon <<a href="mailto:lists@icann.guru" target="_blank">lists@icann.guru</a>> escribió:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif"></span> <u></u>
<u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p>ICANN has absolutely no role in stopping the sale, if EFF and other orgs are serious about this then they should be taking actions in the PA courts system.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>NCSG has spent years telling ICANN to stop overreaching and stick to its limited mandate, now is not the time to throw all of that work in the bin, ICANN does not regulate the sale of companies, we all should know this if we are participating in ICANN policy
processes. Those who wish to intervene in this should do, but at least put time and effort in the right fora.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p><span style="color:black">---</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><b><span style="color:black">James Gannon</span></b><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(181,196,223);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p><b><span style="color:black">From: </span></b><span style="color:black">NCSG-Discuss <<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>> on behalf of Mitch Stoltz <<a href="mailto:mitch@EFF.ORG" target="_blank">mitch@EFF.ORG</a>><br>
<b>Reply to: </b>Mitch Stoltz <<a href="mailto:mitch@EFF.ORG" target="_blank">mitch@EFF.ORG</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Saturday, 7 December 2019 at 00:11<br>
<b>To: </b>"<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>" <<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [proposed letter] NCSG Concerns About the Sale of the Public Interest Registry to Ethos Capital</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I support submitting the letter drafted by Ayden. Amr proposed, in the alternative, "engaging with both ICANN and PIR on how PIR can better serve the needs of civil society." While I support such engagement, it gives us no leverage to effect
change. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On the NTEN call yesterday, Andrew Sullivan and Erik Brooks said that they intend to conclude the sale as quickly as possible, but no later than the first quarter of 2020. Once the sale is finalized, we will have little to no influence
over the operation of .ORG. The only formal constraint on that operation is the Registry Agreement between PIR and ICANN. And earlier this year, when that agreement was renewed, it was altered to make it less protective of registrants in several ways. ICANN
staff dismissed thousands of comments that were nearly unanimous in opposing the new contractual terms. There was no multistakeholder input.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This means that if we don't stop or at least delay the sale, we can "engage" with the newly for-profit PIR all we want, but they will have little incentive to make any changes.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">There is plenty that an unrestrained PIR can do to hurt the interests of noncommercial registrants. The reason there hasn't been much harm yet is because of ISOC's influence, or at least ISOC's concern for its reputation. A mysterious private
equity firm that didn't exist eight months ago will have no such compunctions. <i>
And we will have no real influence.</i> That's why we need to call on ICANN to halt the sale. How can we fail to respond
<i>now</i>, when it might mean something?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<pre>Mitch Stoltz<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre>Senior Staff Attorney, EFF | 415-436-9333 x142<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre><a href="https://www.eff.org/donate" target="_blank">https://www.eff.org/donate</a> | <a href="https://act.eff.org/" target="_blank">https://act.eff.org/</a> <u></u><u></u></pre>
<div>
<p>On 12/4/19 7:43 AM, Nick Shorey wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<p>Hi Ayden,<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Thanks for the responses. I agree it is possible it could be seen as an indirect change, though I read it more as a situation where PIR were to outsource registry backend operations for example.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Re open tender - I’d personally prefer PIR remained as it were. An open tender process risks the potential for an even less appropriate operator winning the bid.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Kind regards,<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p>Nick<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif;color:black">Nick Shorey<br>
Phone: +44 (0) 7552 455 988<br>
<a href="mailto:lists@nickshorey.com" target="_blank">Email: lists@nickshorey.com</a><br>
Skype: nick.shorey<br>
Twitter: @nickshorey<br>
LinkedIn: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin" target="_blank">www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin</a><br>
Web: <a href="http://www.nickshorey.com" target="_blank">www.nickshorey.com</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Helvetica,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p>On 4 Dec 2019, at 15:32, Amr Elsadr <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@ICANNPOLICY.NINJA" target="_blank">aelsadr@ICANNPOLICY.NINJA</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi,<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Dec 4, 2019, at 5:24 PM, Ayden Férdeline <<a href="mailto:icann@FERDELINE.COM" target="_blank">icann@FERDELINE.COM</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This letter is not about halting the sale; it is about preventing the transfer of the Registry Agreements for .ORG, .NGO, and .ONG to Ethos Capital. The decision to sell PIR's assets is indeed a matter for ISOC to decide. If this is not
clear please feel free to edit the letter to make this distinction more evident. Thanks!<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
</blockquote>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Nobody (to my knowledge) has suggested that a transfer of the Registry Agreements to Ethos will take place. This would make Ethos the Contracted Party, but by all accounts I’ve seen, they will still remain with PIR.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">But yes…, I do agree that this might qualify as an indirect change of control.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The way that the letter is currently worded suggests that the NCSG will ask the ICANN Board to terminate PIR’s Registry Agreements, and transfer them to another entity.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Amr<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div>