Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION. We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market. PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well. Thoughts? Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org>
I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11.... that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits. - Evan On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote:
Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION.
We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market.
PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well.
Thoughts?
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org _______________________________________________ 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.
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56
Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not. I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements. Cheers, Roberto On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote: I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11.... that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits. - Evan On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION. We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market. PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well. Thoughts? Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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.
Understood. Those feel like solvable problems Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 10:33:55 AM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Cc: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] . NGO Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not. I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements. Cheers, Roberto On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote: I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11.... that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits. - Evan On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION. We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market. PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well. Thoughts? Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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.
On 13/01/2020 15:37, Jonathan Zuck wrote:
Understood. Those feel like solvable problems
All except for one: registrations. :) The scalability issue is problematic because of the number of languages involved and the number of jurisdictions. It also would require a solid definition of what is a non-profit organisation. The registration revenue would probably not cover the costs of operation. Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com **********************************************************
Perhaps we could go the opposite direction. Have PIR keep .NGO and .ONG while divesting .ORG to a non-profit? If they have a plan for making money out of .ORG, they ought to be able to apply it equally to the other TLDs. Just a thought. Bill Jouris On Monday, January 13, 2020, 07:34:24 AM PST, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote: Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not.I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements.Cheers,Roberto On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote: I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11.... that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits. - Evan On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote: Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION. We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market. PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well. Thoughts? Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org_______________________________________________ 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. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada@evanleibovitch or @el56_______________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ 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.
.NGO & .ONG have insignificant numbers of registrations compared to .ORG TLDs 1..org 2 . ngo 3 . . ong 4..xn--clavg 5..xn--ilb6bla6a2e 6..xn--nqv7f 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema DUMs 1..org- 10M 2 . .ngo -3,800 3.. ong-3,800 4..xn--clavg - 1,100 5..xn--nqv7f - 235 6..xn--ilb6bla6a2e - 78 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema - N/ Source: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/pir-isoc-ethos-capital-10jan20-e... Kindest regards, Olivier P.S. Also see: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200113_a_stronger_pir_and_dot_org_standing_b... On 13/01/2020 18:01, Bill Jouris via CPWG wrote:
Perhaps we could go the opposite direction. Have PIR keep .NGO and .ONG while divesting .ORG to a non-profit? If they have a plan for making money out of .ORG, they ought to be able to apply it equally to the other TLDs.
Just a thought.
Bill Jouris
On Monday, January 13, 2020, 07:34:24 AM PST, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote:
Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not. I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements. Cheers, Roberto
On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote:
I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11....
that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits.
- Evan
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote:
Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION.
We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market.
PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well.
Thoughts?
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org <http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto: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.
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto: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.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto: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.
_______________________________________________ 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
There's no plan for making money out of a TLD with 10 million registrations that can be applied equally to domains with less than 4,000 registrations. Greg Shatan greg@isoc-ny.org President, ISOC-NY *"The Internet is for everyone"* On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 8:57 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:
.NGO & .ONG have insignificant numbers of registrations compared to .ORG
TLDs 1..org 2 . ngo 3 . . ong 4..xn--clavg 5..xn--ilb6bla6a2e 6..xn--nqv7f 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema
DUMs 1..org- 10M 2 . .ngo -3,800 3.. ong-3,800 4..xn--clavg - 1,100 5..xn--nqv7f - 235 6..xn--ilb6bla6a2e - 78 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema - N/
Source: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/pir-isoc-ethos-capital-10jan20-e... Kindest regards,
Olivier
P.S. Also see: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200113_a_stronger_pir_and_dot_org_standing_b...
On 13/01/2020 18:01, Bill Jouris via CPWG wrote:
Perhaps we could go the opposite direction. Have PIR keep .NGO and .ONG while divesting .ORG to a non-profit? If they have a plan for making money out of .ORG, they ought to be able to apply it equally to the other TLDs.
Just a thought.
Bill Jouris
On Monday, January 13, 2020, 07:34:24 AM PST, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote:
Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not. I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements. Cheers, Roberto
On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11....
that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits.
- Evan
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote:
Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION.
We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market.
PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well.
Thoughts?
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org <http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> _______________________________________________ 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.
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ 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.
_______________________________________________ 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.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing listCPWG@icann.orghttps://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.
I don't understand. The point is not to have another wealthy non profit but to have an alternative to ORG, run by a nonprofit. The current numbers aren't relevant. The fact that they are currently expensive can also be remedied. I'm not suggesting this INSTEAD of revisions to the ORG agreement but in addition to to them. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 11:16:51 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] . NGO There's no plan for making money out of a TLD with 10 million registrations that can be applied equally to domains with less than 4,000 registrations. Greg Shatan greg@isoc-ny.org<mailto:greg@isoc-ny.org> President, ISOC-NY "The Internet is for everyone" On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 8:57 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> wrote: .NGO & .ONG have insignificant numbers of registrations compared to .ORG TLDs 1..org 2 . ngo 3 . . ong 4..xn--clavg 5..xn--ilb6bla6a2e 6..xn--nqv7f 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema DUMs 1..org- 10M 2 . .ngo -3,800 3.. ong-3,800 4..xn--clavg - 1,100 5..xn--nqv7f - 235 6..xn--ilb6bla6a2e - 78 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema - N/ Source: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/pir-isoc-ethos-capital-10jan20-e... Kindest regards, Olivier P.S. Also see: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200113_a_stronger_pir_and_dot_org_standing_b... On 13/01/2020 18:01, Bill Jouris via CPWG wrote: Perhaps we could go the opposite direction. Have PIR keep .NGO and .ONG while divesting .ORG to a non-profit? If they have a plan for making money out of .ORG, they ought to be able to apply it equally to the other TLDs. Just a thought. Bill Jouris On Monday, January 13, 2020, 07:34:24 AM PST, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com><mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote: Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not. I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements. Cheers, Roberto On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote: I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11.... that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits. - Evan On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION. We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market. PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well. Thoughts? Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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.
.ngo + .ong takeup is not only about price. The policies and technical implementation is bloated and makes it hard to sell -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Date: Tuesday 14 January 2020 at 04:31 To: Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org>, Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] . NGO I don't understand. The point is not to have another wealthy non profit but to have an alternative to ORG, run by a nonprofit. The current numbers aren't relevant. The fact that they are currently expensive can also be remedied. I'm not suggesting this INSTEAD of revisions to the ORG agreement but in addition to to them. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 11:16:51 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] . NGO There's no plan for making money out of a TLD with 10 million registrations that can be applied equally to domains with less than 4,000 registrations. Greg Shatan greg@isoc-ny.org<mailto:greg@isoc-ny.org> President, ISOC-NY "The Internet is for everyone" On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 8:57 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> wrote: .NGO & .ONG have insignificant numbers of registrations compared to .ORG TLDs 1..org 2 . ngo 3 . . ong 4..xn--clavg 5..xn--ilb6bla6a2e 6..xn--nqv7f 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema DUMs 1..org- 10M 2 . .ngo -3,800 3.. ong-3,800 4..xn--clavg - 1,100 5..xn--nqv7f - 235 6..xn--ilb6bla6a2e - 78 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema - N/ Source: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/pir-isoc-ethos-capital-10jan20-e... Kindest regards, Olivier P.S. Also see: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200113_a_stronger_pir_and_dot_org_standing_b... On 13/01/2020 18:01, Bill Jouris via CPWG wrote: Perhaps we could go the opposite direction. Have PIR keep .NGO and .ONG while divesting .ORG to a non-profit? If they have a plan for making money out of .ORG, they ought to be able to apply it equally to the other TLDs. Just a thought. Bill Jouris On Monday, January 13, 2020, 07:34:24 AM PST, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com><mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote: Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not. I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements. Cheers, Roberto On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote: I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11.... that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits. - Evan On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION. We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market. PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well. Thoughts? Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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.
Agreed but is there a middle ground if we started fresh? Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 6:38:14 AM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>; Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] . NGO .ngo + .ong takeup is not only about price. The policies and technical implementation is bloated and makes it hard to sell -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Date: Tuesday 14 January 2020 at 04:31 To: Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org>, Olivier Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] . NGO I don't understand. The point is not to have another wealthy non profit but to have an alternative to ORG, run by a nonprofit. The current numbers aren't relevant. The fact that they are currently expensive can also be remedied. I'm not suggesting this INSTEAD of revisions to the ORG agreement but in addition to to them. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 11:16:51 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Cc: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] . NGO There's no plan for making money out of a TLD with 10 million registrations that can be applied equally to domains with less than 4,000 registrations. Greg Shatan greg@isoc-ny.org<mailto:greg@isoc-ny.org> President, ISOC-NY "The Internet is for everyone" On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 8:57 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>> wrote: .NGO & .ONG have insignificant numbers of registrations compared to .ORG TLDs 1..org 2 . ngo 3 . . ong 4..xn--clavg 5..xn--ilb6bla6a2e 6..xn--nqv7f 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema DUMs 1..org- 10M 2 . .ngo -3,800 3.. ong-3,800 4..xn--clavg - 1,100 5..xn--nqv7f - 235 6..xn--ilb6bla6a2e - 78 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema - N/ Source: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/pir-isoc-ethos-capital-10jan20-e... Kindest regards, Olivier P.S. Also see: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200113_a_stronger_pir_and_dot_org_standing_b... On 13/01/2020 18:01, Bill Jouris via CPWG wrote: Perhaps we could go the opposite direction. Have PIR keep .NGO and .ONG while divesting .ORG to a non-profit? If they have a plan for making money out of .ORG, they ought to be able to apply it equally to the other TLDs. Just a thought. Bill Jouris On Monday, January 13, 2020, 07:34:24 AM PST, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com><mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote: Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not. I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements. Cheers, Roberto On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote: I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11.... that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits. - Evan On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION. We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market. PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well. Thoughts? Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto: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.
On 14/01/2020 01:57, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
.NGO & .ONG have insignificant numbers of registrations compared to .ORG
There's little or no demand, Olivier, The .NGO/.ONG gTLDs reflect ICANN's clueless pursuit of competition in the face of the brick wall of demand. With the rise of the ccTLDs more NGOs and do-gooder organisations are using ccTLDs. It gives them credibility in their "markets". Most of the .ORG registrations are historical and have been built up over the last thirty years or so. The unconscious irony of that CircleID piece mentioning "speculators that warehouse .ORG and other domain names, with the aim of selling them later for huge profits" was quite funny. Regards...jmcc
TLDs 1..org 2 . ngo 3 . . ong 4..xn--clavg 5..xn--ilb6bla6a2e 6..xn--nqv7f 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema
DUMs 1..org- 10M 2 . .ngo -3,800 3.. ong-3,800 4..xn--clavg - 1,100 5..xn--nqv7f - 235 6..xn--ilb6bla6a2e - 78 7..xn-nqv7fs00ema - N/
Source: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/pir-isoc-ethos-capital-10jan20-e... Kindest regards,
Olivier
P.S. Also see: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200113_a_stronger_pir_and_dot_org_standing_b...
On 13/01/2020 18:01, Bill Jouris via CPWG wrote:
Perhaps we could go the opposite direction. Have PIR keep .NGO and .ONG while divesting .ORG to a non-profit? If they have a plan for making money out of .ORG, they ought to be able to apply it equally to the other TLDs.
Just a thought.
Bill Jouris
On Monday, January 13, 2020, 07:34:24 AM PST, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> wrote:
Be aware that as of today the operation of .NGO/.ONG is not a profitable business. Very few registrars sell them, mostly because of the added complication of the validation step (the registrant is required to be a proper NGO), the bundle (the registration in either .NGO or .ONG will automatically allocate also the other one) and the high price (it is high to cover the additional costs for the items above). On top of that, a minimum fee has to be paid to ICANN regardless whether domain names are sold or not. I am not aware of any changes in PIR to address this problem, so it is fairly likely that a new owner of .NGO/.ONG will be in bad shape, because it will not have the profitable .ORG to support the losing business, nor will it have any power to exert onto the backend provider to force them to support a TLD that has very specific additional requirements. Cheers, Roberto
On 13.01.2020, at 16:12, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org>> wrote:
I floated this exact idea on another mailing list Dec 11....
that as a condition of acquiring .ORG. Ethos divested of .NGO/.ONG to a community body, and then provided a fund to assist the brand-altering costs of any nonprofits that wanted to move. In the forum it was presented, it was flat out rejected as a half measure when the objective was to stop the sale --- so I never pursued it further. In fact, since .NGO already has a vetting process in place (which could be modified in order to scale) it could more reliably be a genuine no-freeloader place for nonprofits.
- Evan
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote:
Working on an outline for a response from us on this whole ORG thing and had a crazy idea. What if we suggest that PIR be asked to divest itself of NGO and award that to the new nonprofit. Right now PIR have a kind of monopoly on the field with those two as well as FOUNDATION.
We've had a lot of discussion about making sure there is a public interest driven registry and a safe place for the nonprofit community. NGO already has a lot of those requirements in place and could be relaunched with a more specific set of commitments in the contract. We could even figure out how to minimize the NGO presence in the secondary market.
PIR having NGO as a competitor might help keep them in line as well.
Thoughts?
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org <http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto: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.
-- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch or @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto: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.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto: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.
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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.
-- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com **********************************************************
participants (8)
-
Bill Jouris -
Evan Leibovitch -
Greg Shatan -
John McCormac -
Jonathan Zuck -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond -
Roberto Gaetano