[CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] [GTLD-WG] Brainstorming

[Evan Leibovitch]

On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 06:01, Roberto Gaetano <
mail.roberto.gaetano at gmail.com> wrote:


> Just one note about the non-profit status. There are very tight
> requirements, scrutinised by the US IRS. Per had it because all profits
> were either passed on to a non-profit organization like ISOC or used
> directly for non-profit activities.
>

The US is not the only country that has non-profit status for corporations,
and PIR is not obligated to be an American organization.

The change to for-profit mans that, regardless of whatever platitudes,
B-corp statuses, advisory groups and promises Ethos can make, at day's end
its goal is maximizing profit and/or company value. There's nothing
stopping Ethos from breaking all its progressive promises if it doesn't
meet its targets, or building up the value of PIR then flipping it to an
owner without such community motivations.

I doubt that the subscriber to an investment fund would ever accept this
> approach.
>

Probably. But since there was no openness to the search for a buyer, no
publicly visible competitive process, we'll never know what options could
have been available.

For this reason PIR will seek B Corporation certification, that would not
> make sense for a non-profit.
>

Two points here:

   - Ethos says it's only investigating B-corp status, it hasn't committed.

   - Some time ago in another life I examined B-corp certification and
   found it generally pointless. Its most common application is by startups
   seeking VC from ethical investors.

- Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20191125/323dddaa/attachment.html>