<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Greg, <div><br></div><div>I disagree with your concern that resistance to the deal is being driven by "special interests". I've witnessed several accusations of that sort in this very group. I think there are enough significant players to say their is genuine lack of consent across the community. I can list significant players in a future email if you'd like. </div><div><br></div><div>However I think your point below is very useful ...</div><div><br></div><div>"<span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">From an individual end-user perspective, how do we define what "good" means and how do ensure that, if the sale happens, it's good for end-users (and if it's not good for end-users, it shouldn't happen)? That is where we need to focus our efforts."</span></div><div><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif">Cheers,</font></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif">David</font></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 4:48 PM Greg Shatan <<a href="mailto:greg@isoc-ny.org">greg@isoc-ny.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">In my view the Cooperative idea is a non-starter, if its stated goal is to take .ORG away from ISOC and leave ISOC with nothing. This does more to muddy the waters than to to clarify them -- though it is a great way to get attention.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">ISOC never said it didn't want to run .ORG. And there's no reason to believe that the Ethos sale was contemplated when the contract was renewed. As for the price caps, ICANN has been the primary driver for removing them, by getting all registries on the 2013 agreement. There are legitimate reasons for concern about the transaction, but these are not. These are distractions.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">As a matter of good governance, ISOC had to consider the concerns arising from largely relying on a single source of income. It's not unheard of, but it's best avoided. (See footnote) ISOC had no choice but to consider whether it would be a more responsible steward of its mission (<a href="https://www.internetsociety.org/mission/" style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" target="_blank">https://www.internetsociety.org/mission/</a>) by changing this situation, e.g., by selling PIR. I assume this has long been on ISOC's mind. That does not mean that this sale to this buyer is the right decision -- but it provides much-needed context. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"> </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Simply losing .ORG would be incredibly destructive of ISOC's mission and operations, and would be the worst possible outcome from an ISOC governance standpoint (and every other ISOC standpoint). It's interesting that Dyson et al. are making a proposal that would essentially bury ISOC. It's certainly not an outcome that ISOC would or could ever put on the table.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I would not jump to the conclusion that a sale of PIR is counter to the interests of any other non-profit, much less every other non-profit. Ethos Capital is largely an unknown factor. Whatever their strategy, their goal is almost certainly to increase the value of PIR. Driving away its customer base will do the opposite. Ethos may be able to make investments in PIR that ISOC could not (e.g., turning PIR from a consumer of back-end services to a provider of back-end services), and which would make PIR a stronger company.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">That said, I'm still skeptical about Ethos Capital. I have plenty of experience with the private equity world and its hard to imagine any PE (Private Equity) firm as the ideal home of .ORG. On the other hand, PE firms have many different approaches, and we can't jump to the conclusion that Ethos will repeat some other PE horror story. (And there have been numerous PE horror stories, along with even more numerous PE success stories.) Their stated approach provides some comfort, though it's too vague and too oriented toward loose "promises" rather than binding commitments. Their current investments (all minority holdings which may have been contributed to the PE fund rather than originated by it) are fairly standard tech investments that do not reveal any public interest orientation.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">As for community resistance, a lot of it still seems ill-informed and may well be driven by "special interests" wielding the "community" as a tool. The resistance is likely sincere on the part of many non-profits, based only on the information they've been fed and concerns about Ethos arising from lack of information. (For a fascinating and disturbing example of non-profits being manipulated to lobby against their own interests, see the article about the Energy industry and NAACP chapters at <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/05/business/energy-environment/naacp-utility-donations.html" style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" target="_blank">https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/05/business/energy-environment/naacp-utility-donations.html</a>.) And who knows if the opposition is "widespread"? It's noisy, and its gotten attention, but that's not the same thing...</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">On paper the sale of .ORG is a Good Thing for ISOC; in reality, it's only good for ISOC if it's good for .ORG. From an individual end-user perspective, how do we define what "good" means and how do ensure that, if the sale happens, it's good for end-users (and if it's not good for end-users, it shouldn't happen)? That is where we need to focus our efforts.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Best regards,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Footnote: Cooper Union, the storied engineering school in New York, is largely dependent on rent from the land it owns under the Chrysler Building. For decades, this allowed Cooper Union to be tuition-free, but costs outstripped revenue, deficits mounted. Cooper Union was in a bind and roundly criticized for this over-reliance, particularly when they started charging tuition for the first time in history. Fortunately, they had renegotiated the lease during the real estate boom of 2006 with a schedule of future rent hikes that went from $7.8 million in 2017 to $32.5 million in 2019 (and then $41 million in 2028), and they are on the road to recovery. But there's no such pot of gold at the end of the .ORG rainbow.)</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"> </div><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 2:51 PM David Mackey <<a href="mailto:mackey361@gmail.com" target="_blank">mackey361@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Alan, <div><br></div><div>Agreed. Your points make sense from an iSOC centric perspective. </div><div><br></div><div>I guess there's irony in that iSOC's organizational interests seem to be in conflict with interests of other stakeholders in the larger Internet community. Who could have seen that coming? Multistakeholder model?</div><div><br></div><div>I guess it's not totally surprising as we've seen the Internet expand over decades across the globe to the point where organizations like PIR are valued in the billions of dollars. As the Internet continues to expand, and as the value to global society increases, we probably can all agree that an end user's perspective is probably worth more than ever before, and yet still so hard to understand and express. </div><div><br></div><div>Cheers!</div><div>David</div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 1:46 PM Alan Greenberg <<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" target="_blank">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">"It's hard to understand why the iSOC organization is pushing back against strong community resistance."</blockquote>
<br>
Its not so hard to understand. <br>
<br>
- The deal will be good for ISOC. It gives them financial security and gets them out of the Domain name business.<br>
<br>
- They believe that this will work out well for .ORG (and with the recent assurances, perhaps they are right).<br>
<br>
- If this deal is cancelled (or not allowed by ICANN), it is not clear that there will be a replacement that puts .ORG in non-profit hands and will be nearly as lucrative to ISOC - which implies they might have to scale down operations.<br>
<br>
Alan<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
At 08/01/2020 01:24 PM, David Mackey wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Maybe a bonanza for lawyers, but also it also comes with tarnished reputations for .ORG, PIR, iSOC, Andrew Sullivan, etc.
<br>
<br>
It's hard to understand why the iSOC organization is pushing back against strong community resistance.
<br>
<br>
So much for consensus building with the multistakeholder model. Maybe we're headed back towards the days of pre-ICANN Internet Governance with the associated financial costs and time-delays to resolve disputes.
<br>
<br>
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 9:54 AM Alan Greenberg <<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" target="_blank">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a> > wrote:<br>
<dl><dd>I don't see how a proposal to ICANN can imply $ to ISOC. The only way I can interpret this is as Evan has: an outright cancellation of the agreement by ICANN and re-delegate to the new corp.<br>
<br>
</dd><dd>An interesting concept, but if nothing else, the resultant lawsuits would likely to be a bonanza for lawyers...<br>
<br>
</dd><dd>Alan<br>
<br>
</dd><dd>At 08/01/2020 09:25 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><dd>From what I can gather from what's been written so far, they're going to demand ICANN to simply re-delegate the registry to them and leave ISOC with nothing (though the actual proposal to ICANN may be different
and indeed include compensation of some sort). Looks like they want to make the case that .ORG is a resource that needs a custodian rather than commodity that can be tossed around at will. It's comprised of an interesting group that includes ICANN's first
president and the USG person in charge of handing TLD control to it.<br>
<br>
</dd><dd>- Evan<br>
<br>
<br>
</dd><dd>On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 07:05, Jacqueline Morris <<a href="mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com" target="_blank">jam@jacquelinemorris.com</a> > wrote:
<dl><dd>Hi Evan </dd><dd>Do you know if there is a monetary value on this bid that is public yet? Will it give ISOC the endowment that it is looking for?
</dd><dd>Jacqueline A. Morris </dd><dd>Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible and Free. (after
<a href="http://twitter.com/chrislehmann" target="_blank">Chris Lehmann</a> )<br>
<br>
</dd><dd>On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 3:27 AM Evan Leibovitch <<a href="mailto:evan@telly.org" target="_blank">evan@telly.org</a>> wrote:
<dl><dd>Looks like Esther Dyson and others are forming a co-operative to offer an alternative bid to Ethos:<br>
<br>
</dd><dd><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/07/technology/dot-org-private-equity-battle.html" target="_blank">https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/07/technology/dot-org-private-equity-battle.html</a>
<br>
</dd><dd>It is unfortunate that the proposed alternative is yet another US corporation, though the bulk of .ORG registrants are American so this will likely be unchallenged.<br>
</dd><dd>Chance of ISOC accepting to even evaluate this alternative bid without pressure is slim given that many deals like Ethos' contain penalties for backing out. But the pressure is certainly there, and not abating.
<br>
</dd><dd>-- </dd><dd>Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada </dd><dd>@evanleibovitch or @el56 </dd><dd>_______________________________________________ </dd><dd>CPWG mailing list </dd><dd><a href="mailto:CPWG@icann.org" target="_blank">CPWG@icann.org</a> </dd><dd><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg</a><br>
</dd><dd>_______________________________________________ </dd><dd>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (
<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (
<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling
delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.<br>
<br>
</dd></dl>
</dd><dd>_______________________________________________ </dd><dd>CPWG mailing list </dd><dd><a href="mailto:CPWG@icann.org" target="_blank">CPWG@icann.org</a> </dd><dd><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg</a><br>
</dd><dd>_______________________________________________ </dd><dd>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (
<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (
<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling
delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.<br>
<br>
</dd></dl>
<br>
<br>
</dd><dd>-- <br>
</dd><dd>Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada<br>
</dd><dd>@evanleibovitch or @el56<br>
</dd><dd>_______________________________________________<br>
</dd><dd>CPWG mailing list<br>
</dd><dd><a href="mailto:CPWG@icann.org" target="_blank">CPWG@icann.org</a><br>
</dd><dd><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg</a><br>
<br>
</dd><dd>_______________________________________________<br>
</dd><dd>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (
<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (
<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling
delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</dd></blockquote>
</dd><dd>_______________________________________________<br>
</dd><dd>CPWG mailing list<br>
</dd><dd><a href="mailto:CPWG@icann.org" target="_blank">CPWG@icann.org</a><br>
</dd><dd><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg</a><br>
<br>
</dd><dd>_______________________________________________<br>
</dd><dd>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank"> https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank"> https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery
or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.<br>
</dd></dl>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
CPWG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CPWG@icann.org" target="_blank">CPWG@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>