Letter from Senators+ on .ORG Sale

[Sam Lanfranco]

Scott,
Good question. Some of us have tried to get a discussion going about the
exact nature of the entity that comes out of the Ethos Capital purchase of
PIR. Would it be a benefit corporation or a "Certified" B Corp LLC, or
what? Another question is around the actual powers of any Advisory
Committee, especially in light of the fact that PIR kept its Advisory
Committee in the dark with regard to the sale itself. A third question (for
the lawyers among us) is are there specific terms in the .org registry
contract that ICANN can insist on that improve the protection of the public
interest? 
To date, in the case of Ethos Capital there has been no clarification about
the benefit corporation/LLC/B Corp Certification area. There have been only
good will promises with regard to an Advisory Committee, and no discussion
about what ICANN could, or could not, put in the .org registry contract. 
To put it bluntly, Ethos Capital has said "Trust us", some (Vint Cerf) have
said "Trust them", and a lot of us have said "We are unhappy", others have
said "We too are interested in buying PIR".
Nobody, including ICANN org and the Board, has really addressed your core
question. 
Sam Lanfranco 
---- Original Message ----
From: Scott Johnson 
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Sent: Tue, Jan 14, 2020, 10:36 PM
Subject: Re: Letter from Senators+ on .ORG Sale

Has anyone clearly defined a set of circumstances whereby the sale of PIR 
 to SANYBUYER would be acceptable by the consensus of relevant parties? 
 Put another way, what specific performance on the part of buyer and 
 seller would be required to make any such transition comfortable moving 
 forward?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20200115/862a0b32/attachment.htm>