[proposed letter] NCSG Concerns About the Sale of the Public Interest Registry to Ethos Capital

[Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele]

Ok, that sounds fine to me.


On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 5:07 PM Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:

> Hi Caleb,
>
> Thanks for reviewing the proposed letter. I responded to your suggestion
> directly in the Google Doc, but just to clarify, I was not proposing an
> auction. I was suggesting that the .ORG registry agreement be put out for a
> competitive public tender whereby prospective gTLD operators would compete
> by proposing registry terms, including public interest commitments that
> would provide consumer benefits, and the contract should be awarded to the
> operator with the best overall package of benefits to non-profit
> organizations.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden Férdeline
>
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Tuesday, 3 December 2019 16:59, Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele <
> muyiwacaleb at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> Hello Ayden,
>
> I made some suggestions, comments, and contributions to the letter.
> However, the concern I have with the public auction is that it will give
> more room to a capitalist who wins the bid and will do anything to make a
> profit including selling registrants data to make a profit which we might
> not be able to confirm except when caught. Even if they are not sold, how
> do we know about government requests for such registrants data is published
> in a transparency report?
>
> Despite that, the purpose of still making PIR a funding opportunity, not
> for profit ISOC will be defeated if sold to a capitalist who does not
> believe in one free and open internet. Come to think of it, if we want a
> not for profit who still relies on donors money to buy it, where will they
> find over a billion dollars to raise money for the bidding?
> Caleb Ogundele
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 4:14 PM Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at icannpolicy.ninja>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would prefer that NCSG not ask ICANN to withhold approval of the sale
>> of PIR. I’m not entirely convinced that it can using 7.5, since
>> effectively, there is no reassignment of control of the gTLDs under PIR’s
>> management. However, this is just a technicality, really. The change that
>> PIR will undergo (specifically, being transformed from a NFP to a
>> For-Profit corp.) is basically as significant as a complete change of
>> control.
>>
>> My problem with this letter is that it doesn’t really do anything for
>> .org registrants, wether they are non-commercial registrants or not (and
>> there are apparently far more “other” registrants who are not
>> non-commercial in the .org space).
>>
>> I’m not aware of any tangible practices by PIR that differentiate it from
>> any other Registry, except perhaps that its profits go to ISOC, instead of
>> going to shareholders. If this change in ownership and NFP status can be
>> leveraged to achieve greater protections for civil society interests, which
>> I believe was meant to be part of PIR’s original mandate when it was
>> assigned management of .org, then this is something I believe is worth
>> pursuing. Who ultimately owns PIR, and who benefits from its revenue (ISOC,
>> Ethos, or anybody else) is not as much of an issue to me. The welfare of
>> civil society actors with .org domain name registrations is more important,
>> imo.
>>
>> If there was ever a time when PIR would be willing to listen to its
>> customer base on how to better serve them, I assume that time is now. It
>> strikes me as irresponsible to not even try. ICANN withholding approval of
>> the change of ownership is pretty much a nuclear option, and I see no added
>> value to anyone, if that measure is resorted to. Not to ISOC, not to PIR
>> and definitely not to PIR’s customers.
>>
>> If anybody is interested in pursuing additional rights for .org
>> registrants, Milton made some interesting suggestions on what those might
>> include here:
>> https://www.internetgovernance.org/2019/11/25/what-to-do-about-org/. It
>> isn’t an exhaustive list, but something to begin working with imo.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Amr
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2019, at 2:50 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I have drafted a letter outlining some concerns about the proposed sale
>> of PIR to Ethos Capital. It is in a Google Doc here.
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GNSxNtZ7k-TtvQkpVXhlSABxi0JYVzDNHU7zZCQtiPU/edit?usp=sharing>
>> In a nutshell, I am calling for ICANN to exercise its right in article 7.5
>> of the .ORG, .NGO, and .ONG Registry Agreements to withhold its approval
>> for ISOC to assign its rights and obligations to Ethos Capital. I hope that
>> the NCSG might consider sending it. Feel free to make/propose edits
>> directly into the document. If the NCSG does not feel comfortable sending
>> it, perhaps interested individuals could sign on instead and we can send it
>> off in our individual capacities? Thanks.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Ayden Férdeline
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> *Ogundele Olumuyiwa Caleb*
> *muyiwacaleb at gmail.com <muyiwacaleb at gmail.com>*
> *234 - 8077377378*
> *234 - 07030777969*
>
>
>

-- 
*Ogundele Olumuyiwa Caleb*
*muyiwacaleb at gmail.com <muyiwacaleb at gmail.com>*
*234 - 8077377378*
*234 - 07030777969*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20191203/99fe40e5/attachment.htm>