debate The fight for .ORG: is it about MONEY or is it about CONTROL?

[Rob Monster]

As some here are aware, I previously presented the bullish case for .ORG:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/why-i-am-bullish-on-org-plutocratic-guilt.1161692/

Although I remain bullish on the .ORG TLD as a domain asset class, there is now a footnote on .ORG because of the change of control event and the precedent that it represents for a major registry.

In the wake of organized backlash against the Ethos/PIR.org deal from capable organizations such as EFF, it appears that propagandists are makeing a case for "nothing to see here". For example note this article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/05/opinion/dot-org-domain.html

This article was written by a Stanford undergrad with a Stanford prof as the byline. Fade Chehade is a Stanford alum. This looks like a propaganda instrument. In fact, I put the odds at 90:10 on that.

Ultimately, I am not convinced that this is not about money. After all, Donuts is not exactly killing it since Abry took over. However, they now control a whopping 242 TLDs. These people are not stupid nor are they lazy.

Fadi is a globalist and an elite technocrat. He has a keen understanding of power, governance and realpolitik. I believe he is entirely sincere about what he thinks it is at stake. Check out his short TED interview:

https://www.ted.com/talks/fadi_cheh...itizens_can_do_to_claim_power_on_the_internet

The timing of this talk was curious. September 2018 is when the digital censorship programs went into overdrive. As some folks know, I was on the front line of that when Godaddy booted Gab.

Fadi wants "Geneva conventions", "technocratic oaths" and "stewards" for acceptable use.

Fadi also comments on Artificial Intelligence. He is absolutely right. Most folks have no idea how much impact AI combined with structured data, wireless broadband, and open standards is going to change the word.

People with access to domains, hosting and vast libraries of open source code, are capable of wielding remarkable things. The tools are already amazing. I believe AI is also in the process of being democratized.

As power of internet publishing gravitates to individuals, the framework for governance on the Internet comes down to the gatekeepers, of which domain registries play a critical role for at least the next 10 years.

Blockchain is plodding along to create a decentralized alternative. It is not ready for prime time yet. However, domains can become more resilient. That is where Epik is focused.

Now that the main industry pundits have had their commentary on .ORG, I am curious to hear what the open source community has to say about the .ORG transaction and its implications. Let's hear it.

 

[Ostrados]

Control is conferred by deciding who gets routed. As legislation or policy changes, registries are gatekeepers that can decide what gets routed or not routed.

Sites that are not visible on the public internet are relatively irrelevant. Most are not going to bother figuring out how to use the decentralization technologies as long as they can find TMZ, or whatever distracts them.

You have to think a few steps ahead. If the objective is control, then first secure the asset, then set its governance, and then start adjusting the goalposts around acceptable use, accreditation, etc.

My point referenced above is that this is not about .ORG. It is shaping up to be a relatively predictable multi-act play, which I described as an Italian menu.

I see your point but this more of a conspiracy theory that I dont think is needed in first place,

The world is naturally moving away from globalization and shifting slowly towards decentraliztion, so decentralized web could be destiny mainly due to intersections of benefits and interests of many powers & forces, not because one/few of these powers pushing for it.

Saying that monopoly will be used to push for decentralization making us go back to globalization.. which means the new entities in control will not have decentralized web as advantage for them and they will make sure that decentralized web will not see the day of light.

 

[Ostrados]

My Conclusion:
The correct answer is that they bought .org for the money, they simply got a good deal and they went for it. period

 

[oldtimer]

The future is going to be about Personalized Web where all interactions are routed and controlled by AI, that's why it's so important to make sure that AI is not fragmented based on different and opposing Human ideologies, interests, and agendas and that it evolves to become a unified Force For Good.

IMO

 

[Lox]

I banned verisign ips from my landing pages long time ago. Together with bot homes like ovh and hetzner.
All of them were too active, wasting traffic and cpu. In verisign case, this must be the reason...

VS is using (x) number of different bots to protect the internet infrastructure (security, routine tasks, etc), other collecting f.e. experience (* mysterious AI?), x number of bots are deployed, seems very specialized... per tasks.

 

[Rob Monster]

I see your point but this more of a conspiracy theory that I dont think is needed in first place,

The world is naturally moving away from globalization and shifting slowly towards decentraliztion, so decentralized web could be destiny mainly due to intersections of benefits and interests of many powers & forces, not because one/few of these powers pushing for it.

Saying that monopoly will be used to push for decentralization making us go back to globalization.. which means the new entities in control will not have decentralized web as advantage for them and they will make sure that decentralized web will not see the day of light.

As someone on a domain forum you should care that there is a possibility that domains could still work in a resilient decentralized way. That is the essential thesis that Epik has been working on:

https://www.epik.com/resilient/

So, let people buy and sell domains knowing that if push comes to shove, those domains can still work as they did before

In other words, we should not accept the idea that domains stop being important even as decentralized resiliency technology matures. This is a very essential point.

 

[Rob Monster]

My Conclusion:
The correct answer is that they bought .org for the money, they simply got a good deal and they went for it. period

And I am going to disagree. I speculate that the motive was not purely financial and is part of a larger agenda to control namespaces. The moves to date have aligned with my hypothesis.

For you to say that it you have the "correct" answer causes me to place a footnote next to every post you have ever made. What is your incontrovertible evidence of your dogmatic certainty?

 

[Ostrados]

For you to say that it you have the "correct" answer causes me to place a footnote next to every post you have ever made. What is your incontrovertible evidence of your dogmatic certainty?

I said "My" conclusion, which means "correct" according to "Me"... I might be wrong and you have the right to disagree with "Me".

 

[Ostrados]

As someone on a domain forum you should care that there is a possibility that domains could still work in a resilient decentralized way. That is the essential thesis that Epik has been working on:

https://www.epik.com/resilient/

So, let people buy and sell domains knowing that if push comes to shove, those domains can still work as they did before

In other words, we should not accept the idea that domains stop being important even as decentralized resiliency technology matures. This is a very essential point.

That is not what I was discussing, you answered in entirely different direction.

I didnt make any comment that I am against or with anything, I just questioned your theory and argued that it is not valid.

 

[Lox]

Beginning to grasp significance.... thanks for the added information.
BTW is there one public domain article that talks about the newish Verisign patents somewhere?
I realize I could search them out on the patents site one by one, but wondering if someone has already written a commentary on them.
Bob

The one activated today is from the 2009 and it is interconnected with multiple others dating back and forth. There's 2 from 2019 and I don't expect they are going to activate / execute any time sooner than 2025.

Regards

 

[Lox]

... a few new comments on .org sale @ ICANN .org update page.

 

[Ostrados]

Found this:
Information Regarding Ethos Capital’s Agreement to Acquire Public Interest Registry from the Internet Society

Regarding .org price it will go up by 10% per year:

The current price of a .ORG domain name is approximately $10 per year. Our plan is to live within the spirit of historic practice when it comes to pricing, which means, potentially, annual price increases of up to 10 percent on average – which today would equate to approximately $1 per year.- https://www.keypointsabout.org/

 

[BrandCollectors.com]

will renew my .orgs for ten years or more

 

[Ryan3]

If a non-profit that claims to be in the public interest sells out and becomes for-profit, it is no longer in the public interest, it is in the $$$ interest.

Also, here is what prices will be if they increase by 10% annually starting from $10.

Year Price
1 $10.00
2 $11.00
3 $12.10
4 $13.31
5 $14.64
6 $16.11
7 $17.72
8 $19.49
9 $21.44
10 $23.58
11 $25.94
12 $28.53
13 $31.38
14 $34.52
15 $37.97
16 $41.77
17 $45.95
18 $50.54
19 $55.60
20 $61.16
21 $67.27
22 $74.00
23 $81.40
24 $89.54
25 $98.50
26 $108.35
27 $119.18
28 $131.10
29 $144.21
30 $158.63
31 $174.49
32 $191.94
33 $211.14
34 $232.25
35 $255.48
36 $281.02
37 $309.13
38 $340.04
39 $374.04
40 $411.45
41 $452.59
42 $497.85
43 $547.64
44 $602.40
45 $662.64
46 $728.90
47 $801.80
48 $881.97
49 $970.17
50 $1,067.19

 

[BrandCollectors.com]

If a non-profit that claims to be in the public interest sells out and becomes for-profit, it is no longer in the public interest, it is in the $$$ interest.

Also, here is what prices will be if they increase by 10% annually starting from $10.

Year Price
1 $10.00
2 $11.00
3 $12.10
4 $13.31
5 $14.64
6 $16.11
7 $17.72
8 $19.49
9 $21.44
10 $23.58
11 $25.94
12 $28.53
13 $31.38
14 $34.52
15 $37.97
16 $41.77
17 $45.95
18 $50.54
19 $55.60
20 $61.16
21 $67.27
22 $74.00
23 $81.40
24 $89.54
25 $98.50
26 $108.35
27 $119.18
28 $131.10
29 $144.21
30 $158.63
31 $174.49
32 $191.94
33 $211.14
34 $232.25
35 $255.48
36 $281.02
37 $309.13
38 $340.04
39 $374.04
40 $411.45
41 $452.59
42 $497.85
43 $547.64
44 $602.40
45 $662.64
46 $728.90
47 $801.80
48 $881.97
49 $970.17
50 $1,067.19

ok here we go with forever registration by epik.com

 

[Ryan3]

I’m quite happy for Rob to promote his projects. They offer real solutions to real problems.

If Public Interest Registry is now for-profit, they should re-name to Private Interest Registry.

 

[Bob Hawkes]

Also, here is what prices will be if they increase by 10% annually starting from $10.

I am glad someone posted to show how much with compounding even the 10%, allowed under the existing cap, would get over the years.

Of course the issues regarding .org moving to private equity, and the new freedoms on the TLD proposed by ICANN, are concerning for reasons in addition to the economics of price increases.

Bob

 

[oldtimer]

I am still wondering why domain names should cost so much from the registries (and actually increasing) when there are more and more domains being registered across the board every year. What exactly does the registry do for this tax that they are imposing on people.

IMO

 

[branding]

Regarding what @Ryan3 already pointed out.

To give some context, since 2003 wholesale pricing for .org has on average risen 3% each year. Would that have been 10% we would be paying over $27 right now.

In their defense, they don't actually state they will increase the cost by 10% each year but they definitely are hinting at it. Beside a monetary one, there is not one single reason I can think of that would justify a yearly 10% increase in the future.

 

[Lox]

.

I am still wondering why domain names should cost so much from the registries (and actually increasing) when there are more and more domains being registered across the board every year. What exactly does the registry do for this tax that they are imposing on people.

IMO

Because most of the registries don't have backend and they have to $ technical backend service provider s.a. CentralNic etc.

 

[Lox]

Regarding what @Ryan3 already pointed out.

To give some context, since 2003 wholesale pricing for .org has on average risen 3% each year. Would that have been 10% we would be paying over $27 right now.

In their defense, they don't actually state they will increase the cost by 10% each year but they definitely are hinting at it. Beside a monetary one, there is not one single reason I can think of that would justify a yearly 10% increase in the future.

Now, (Ethos) PIR can do whatever suits them, 10% rise is just a small snowflake in the Ice Age movie. What's more important is; increased number of registry reserved domain names s.a. 4d.org , 9g.org ... LL, NL, LN, LLL, LNL, LNN, 1 word etc.

ICANN discussions (planing) related to a clusterKCUF namequatting 2009-2011, ICANN 2013+ (TM, IP holders pressure) and Donuts & co recipe; hold on dictionary, skyrocket renewals, eliminate/skip domainers, get to the end-users directly.

Regards

 

[oldtimer]

.


Because most of the registries don't have backend and they have to $ technical backend service provider s.a. CentralNic etc.

That is true with most registries, but why are the prices increasing every year for the extensions that are getting more and more domains, it's not like they have to build new infrastructure or upgrade their back end systems every year to handle all these millions of new domains. As the total number of domains registered increases the price per domain should go down not up.

IMO

 

[Rob Monster]

That is true with most registries, but why are the prices increasing every year for the extensions that are getting more and more domains, it's not like they have to build new infrastructure or upgrade their back end systems every year to handle all these millions of new domains. As the total number of domains registered increases the price per domain should go down not up.

IMO

Comrade @oldtimer....

Welcome to America. Capitalism rules. We teach our kids to play Monopoly. The object of the game is to bankrupt everyone else. The training starts early.

Seriously though, of course you are correct. That's why they operated as a Public Benefit Corporation. The part most people leave out is .... "whose benefit?". Sounds better in Latin: Cui Bono?

 

[oldtimer]

Comrade @oldtimer....

Welcome to America. Capitalism rules. We teach our kids to play Monopoly. The object of the game is to bankrupt everyone else. The training starts early.

Seriously though, of course you are correct. That's why they operated as a Public Benefit Corporation. The part most people leave out is .... "whose benefit?". Sounds better in Latin: Cui Bono?

I am all for Capitalism, but Capitalism should serve Humanity and enhance the life of people without harming the Environment, I like the fact that there are companies that make washing machines so that people don't have to wash their clothes by hand anymore, or that there are smart and green car manufacturers that make life easier for commuters, and those companies deserve to make a fair amount of profit, but what exactly is it that the registries do for us that creates the need for price increases every year or that even justifies the price that they are charging for domains right now. I am not talking about registrars like Epik that provide so many useful services to us, but the registries and back end operators who supposedly can charge as much as they want without any accountability.

IMO

 

[bmugford]

There is a difference between capitalism and crony capitalism.

Brad

 

[Rob Monster]

There is a difference between capitalism and crony capitalism.

Brad

Well, we totally agree there.

While it may not work for everyone, I like old school free market capitalism combined with philanthropy. People can make fortunes and then leave a positive legacy.

The .ORG registry grew to prominence around a promise of public benefit. It was the Raison D'etre of the entire TLD.

On the surface, this looks like an old school greed-is-good corporate raider stuff:

I could live with that if it were not for the shrinking pool of compelling namespaces. Unfortunately, that's where I draw the line. This deal sucks on too many levels.