jacob-malthouse
jacob-malthouse on Hacker News
Ethos Capital paid $1.135 billion for total, unconditional, purchase of the PIR from ISOC.
ISOC just "grabbed the opportunity when Ethos presented it,"
ISOC have reviewed Ethos’s governance plans and approved them, but will have no means to enforce compliance with those plans.
The deal must be approved by the end of the 1st Quarter 2021 or it fails. The exact date is still confidential.
It must be approved by two bodies – ICANN and the Pennsylvania Orphans Court, which is a specialist court for estates and trusts.
The PIR is incorporated in Pennsylvania and this court must approve changes in the PIR charter in order for Ethos Capital to take ownership.
This is because “the Orphans’ Court judge is the ultimate defender and protector of the fund in question, and the Orphans’ Court will protect that fund and ensure that the fund is distributed to the correct beneficiary”
There is a good introduction to this court at https://www.skhlaw.com/pennsylvania-orphans-court-101-all-th...
This means that if the Pennsylvania Orphans Court has not reached a determination by 1st April next year, or if that decision is being challenged in a manner which delays implementation, the deal fails.
Ethos Capital paid $1.135 billion for total, unconditional, purchase of the PIR from ISOC.
ISOC just "grabbed the opportunity when Ethos presented it,"
ISOC have reviewed Ethos’s governance plans and approved them, but will have no means to enforce compliance with those plans.
The deal must be approved by the end of the 1st Quarter 2021 or it fails. The exact date is still confidential.
It must be approved by two bodies – ICANN and the Pennsylvania Orphans Court, which is a specialist court for estates and trusts.
The PIR is incorporated in Pennsylvania and this court must approve changes in the PIR charter in order for Ethos Capital to take ownership.
This is because “the Orphans’ Court judge is the ultimate defender and protector of the fund in question, and the Orphans’ Court will protect that fund and ensure that the fund is distributed to the correct beneficiary”
There is a good introduction to this court at https://www.skhlaw.com/pennsylvania-orphans-court-101-all-th...
This means that if the Pennsylvania Orphans Court has not reached a determination by 1st April next year, or if that decision is being challenged in a manner which delays implementation, the deal fails.
But the issue people have with it in the Internet Policy Community is not the terms, which we no nothing about.
It is that the way it was done is a radical departure from how decisions are normally made.
Usually you start by saying "I have a problem". In this case it would be "We don't want to run .ORG anymore."
And then you engage the community in an open bottom-up consultative process to come up with the optimal solution.
ISOC applied to run .ORG in 2002. They won a competition to run it against 10 other groups. Here is the original application they submitted to ICANN:
https://archive.icann.org/en/tlds/org/applications/isoc/
They said things like:
"PIR will institute mechanisms for promoting the registry's operation in a manner that is responsive to the needs, concerns, and views of the non-commercial Internet user community."
And:
".ORG is the home of non-commercial entities on the Internet"
https://archive.icann.org/en/tlds/org/applications/isoc/sect...
After running .ORG since 2002, and growing it to over 10 million domains under management under this promise, ISOC's Board suddenly and with no prior consultation, decided to privatize it. They took that decision in a private negotiation over less than 3 months.
That decision making process is not how the Internet maintains a stable and secure infrastructure. It needs careful decision making to ensure reliable, stable, and resilient operations.
Also becoming a B corp is different from getting the certification. the latter is just a reporting standard.
https://www.wholewhale.com/podcast/152-why-we-should-save-or...