PIR response to NCSG ltr to ICANN
Colleagues: Here are some thoughts from PIR on NCSG's letter to ICANN. Although Leon has said that the community needs to talk to PIR and ISOC, it seems that talking to ICANN does not go unnoticed. https://thenew.org/reflecting-on-community-recommendations-to-improve-org/ Is there timeline around a potential letter from At Large? Did anyone in our group get to the community webinar? Any reflections? I hope to find time to listen to it soon. Marita
Hi all I went to the PIR-Ethos webinar which included Jon and Brian from PIR (whom I know) and Erik and Nora (whom I don't know) representing Ethos. As a member of the (now previous) Advisory Council, it was good to hear from the Ethos pair that the same aspirations that PIR discussed with us at our F2F meeting in October are supported by Ethos going forward. From them, there was assurance that it would not be in the best interest of good business practice to interfere with what is already a proven and successful brand and operation. Nora's key points were: * Establishing a PIR Stewardship Council with the authority on matters of concern to the .ORG Community * Forming a Public Benefit LLC * Embedding a commitment on domain registration pricing into the Public Benefit LLC statement at formation * Adopting the principle of transparency. Brian impressed on community safeguards, * PIR would be the same team, mission, values and commitment * PIR would continue as an exemplary registry * With increased focus and innovation for the .ORG mission/community The Stewardship Council's role will be: * a transparent and independent body * comprised of members from the .ORG community * focused on balancing the interests of all .ORG stakeholders. * to provide oversight to safeguard the interests of the .ORG community * to formulate advice and strategic recommendations to the PIR Board * to issue periodic reports There were a range of questions that had been sent in already and these were answered by the four presenters. I have always felt that PIR was between a rock and a hard place when they became the asset traded by ISOC for its own financial security. Yet they are the ones who have to defend their ongoing commitment to safeguarding the interests of the .ORG community and striving to retrieve their trust. The Ethos team were supporting that direction. Time will tell. On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 6:29 AM Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> wrote:
Colleagues: Here are some thoughts from PIR on NCSG's letter to ICANN. Although Leon has said that the community needs to talk to PIR and ISOC, it seems that talking to ICANN does not go unnoticed.
https://thenew.org/reflecting-on-community-recommendations-to-improve-org/
Is there timeline around a potential letter from At Large?
Did anyone in our group get to the community webinar? Any reflections? I hope to find time to listen to it soon.
Marita
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
Dear Marita, a WIKI page relating to this topic has been opened since late November on https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+ISOC... To this date it has remained static. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/12/2019 17:29, Marita Moll wrote:
Colleagues: Here are some thoughts from PIR on NCSG's letter to ICANN. Although Leon has said that the community needs to talk to PIR and ISOC, it seems that talking to ICANN does not go unnoticed.
https://thenew.org/reflecting-on-community-recommendations-to-improve-org/
Is there timeline around a potential letter from At Large?
Did anyone in our group get to the community webinar? Any reflections? I hope to find time to listen to it soon.
Marita
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
I've been doing my best to keep up to date with all the information coming out of this transaction. Thank you Marita, and others, for continuing to share information sources on this topic to this list. As I search for a concluding opinion as an end user of the Internet on this transaction, the best case result I see is that this transaction is neutral for me as an end user. .ORG remains as an important and unique player in the registry ecosystem championing Public Interest causes as before just under the control of Ethos rather than the Internet Society. On the other hand, the worst case scenario is that this transaction corrupts the Public Interest stakeholder role that PIR has historically represented on the Internet. The historical role of PIR has important benefits to me as an end user. It also changes the relationship of .ORG registrants from assumed stakeholders of .ORG protected by the Internet Society into future customers of Ethos. Finally, the nature of the transaction does not appear to fit the expected process you'd find in the multistakeholder model used in ICANN. The CEO and board of the Internet Society seem to be acting narrowly from their interests of the Internet Society organization, and not accepting input from the larger Internet community. Is the Internet Society a "stakeholder" in the larger Internet community, or is it an independent actor strictly controlled by its CEO and board? The other thing to consider is that Ethos seems to be promising no significant changes how .ORG is run in the short term, but the eventual payoff to Ethos is the necessary sale of PIR to another company at some point in the (distant?) future. In retrospect, the discussion around removing the price cap on .ORG prices earlier this year, seems to be rather short sighted. Has anyone thought of the long term impact to end users and the broader Internet if control of PIR switches from the Internet Society to Ethos? Have I missed something important in my high level thinking? On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 4:13 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:
Dear Marita,
a WIKI page relating to this topic has been opened since late November on https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+ISOC...
To this date it has remained static. Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 20/12/2019 17:29, Marita Moll wrote:
Colleagues: Here are some thoughts from PIR on NCSG's letter to ICANN. Although Leon has said that the community needs to talk to PIR and ISOC, it seems that talking to ICANN does not go unnoticed.
https://thenew.org/reflecting-on-community-recommendations-to-improve-org/
Is there timeline around a potential letter from At Large?
Did anyone in our group get to the community webinar? Any reflections? I hope to find time to listen to it soon.
Marita
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhDhttp://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
participants (4)
-
David Mackey -
Marita Moll -
Maureen Hilyard -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond