IT.COM

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

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

The real reason for the .ORG change of control event is about:

  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.
  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.

Rob Monster

Founder of EpikTop Member
Epik Founder
Impact
18,389
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.
 
Last edited:
18
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
The sale of the .org registry to a for-profit private equity firm would have “a disastrous effect on stability,” a DNS specialist has warned. In a letter to ICANN posted online on Tuesday, the Packet Clearing House (PCH) argues that a move away from the registry’s current non-profit status would result in significantly less money being spent on .org’s operational costs.

Packet Clearing House currently provides DNS services (servers) to .org, so they are well familiar with the subject.

PCH provides graphs and modelling to explain its estimate that the move to Ethos would result in three days of downtime a year. “Our conclusion is that the decreased operational spending necessary for any commercial purchaser to break even would result in an increase from zero down-time to, on average, slightly more than three days without service each year,” it argues.

It notes that “three days per year of interrupted communications for millions of not-for-profit organizations would unacceptably damage the stability and functionality of the Internet, and more broadly of society globally.”

PCH also delves into the hot-button question of how much Ethos Capital will raise the cost of .org domains.

More details:

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/mitchell-woodcock-to-jeffrey-12dec19-en.pdf

I read that in another article as well. Keep in mind PCH isn't exactly neutral. They currently provide services for afilias.

Once ethos would gain control over .org it isn't unlikely afilias would lose their contract to donuts given the close ties to ethos.

They do raise some valid points though.

There has been discussion about cutting down on the number of root servers for a while now. As long as it doesn't impact the quality of the network it shouldn't be an issue.

Personally I wouldn't go for the bare minimal level of redundancy but you know, I wouldn't sell .org to an equity firm either.
 
3
•••
I still don't understand this hype...
How many domainers really invest in .ORG? At least they have 100 domains...
I'm almost sure: very minority...
 
0
•••
I still don't understand this hype...

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

(Martin Niemöller)
 
2
•••
Who are "they"?
There is only one answer here: the so-called "non-profit" ICANN...
It always was... and this case - just next episode of the same "non-profit" story...
 
1
•••
And Afilias role/future is still unknown here...
If it remains - nothing to discuss at all.
If no - I only support any TLD migration away from Afilias...
 
0
•••
I still don't understand this hype...
How many domainers really invest in .ORG? At least they have 100 domains...
I'm almost sure: very minority...

I am not a big fan of this "How does it effect me?" mindset in general. It is self-centered.
It would effect millions of other people and organizations in a negative way.

The legacy extensions (COM/NET/ORG) existed far before the current internet did and should be treated with respect.

These are not new extensions where a party actually owns them.
They are essentially a public utility, and should be treated as such.

There is a reason regulation is needed with a defacto monopoly, like other local utility companies.

Everyone would be at the complete mercy and whim of them with no protections for the current or future registrants.

It also doesn't help that so many charities and non-profits would be effected in a negative way.

Putting this kind of monopoly into the hands of a private equity company with no track record is irresponsible, and just plain wrong.

Brad
 
Last edited:
7
•••
I am not a big fan of this "How does it effect me?" mindset in general. It is self-centered.
It would effect millions of other people and organization in a negative way.

The legacy extensions (COM/NET/ORG) existed far before the current internet did and should be treated with respect.

These are not new extensions where a party actually owns them.
They are essentially a public utility, and should be treated as such.

There is a reason regulation is needed with a defacto monopoly, like other local utility companies.

Everyone would be at the complete mercy and whim of them with no protections for the current or future registrants.

It also doesn't help that so many charities and non-profits would be effected in a negative way.

Putting this kind of monopoly into the hands of a private equity company with no track record is irresponsible, and just plain wrong.

Brad

Great comment.

It is not just the lack of track record that should cause pause. It is the fact that Fadi is pursuing this via proxy. It is the cloak and dagger stuff that triggers the alarms. Fadi, as former CEO of ICANN running a registry would not be so alarming but raider capitalism stuff smells like a pile of ... trouble.
 
3
•••
I don't see any "respect" from Afilias...
They massively block the domains whole this 2019 year... in automode just using various 3rd-party blacklists...
And silently... without any notification to registrants. Only self-monitoring can detect all these victims.
 
1
•••
I don't see any "respect" from Afilias...
They massively block the domains whole this 2019 year... in automode just using various 3rd-party blacklists...
And silently... without any notification to registrants. Only self-monitoring can detect all these victims.

I have no love for Afilias, but they simply provide the back end for .org.
They have no say in the pricing or other policies related to the extension.

This is about the contract between ICANN & ISOC/PIR. Who controls that contract actually controls the ability to set pricing and potential censorship policies.

That is why it is so irresponsible to transfer it from a non-profit with a good track record to a private equity company connected to so many ICANN insiders, with no track record, after ICANN removed price caps, in a highly secretive process with no protections in place for current registrants.

Brad
 
Last edited:
3
•••
serverHold is placed by Afilias.
No any other party controls it.
 
0
•••
PIR - just marketing team for .ORG
They don't have any relations to serverHold or to other operations in registry. It can be set/removed by Afilias only.
And removal time takes up to 1 week after your request.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Afilias bots can block any domains in their controlled TLDs just relying on 3rd-party BLs... even just parked... even on Sedo or Dan... or even without any content.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Bottom line: your petition de facto means to save Afilias.
And I don't support it.
 
0
•••
Afilias bots can block any domains in their controlled TLDs just relying on 3rd-party BLs... even just parked... even on Sedo or Dan... or even without any content

Afilias is technical subcontractor or PIR. Packet Clearing House (PCH) is a subcontractor of Afilias. Both are responsible for technical infrastructure. And, as @bmugford wrote, they "have no say in the pricing or other policies related to the extension". Both Afilias and PCH, however, have some (one would suppose professional) staff and experience to perform technical tasks. Now, what likely happens is - one of these engineers, lets call him mr. John Doe, elected to use Spamhaus lists and implement instant blocking to ensure technical stability. Was this decision correct? Obviously, no. Because Spamhaus is known to include innocent domains and networks into their lists. I've experienced this myself in pre-domaining "career" (I was a sysadmin at local ISP at this time). I might write a lot of horror stories about spamhaus, but it would be offtopic here. Long story short - the issues you are experiencing are caused by spamhaus. Spamhaus is the problem here. Nobody should use spamhaus. One John, an engineer from Afilias or their subcontractor PCH, made a big mistake by including spamhaus lists into their filters. Thats all. The root of your problem still remains the same - Spamhaus.

In future, Afilias may elect another subcontractor (not PCH). Or they may hire another team of engineers, so the spamhaus lists will instantly disappear from their infrastructure. Or, PIR may drop both Afilias and PCH and select somebody else. It is all technical stuff, and current .org problem is completely different, as it is administrative or even political.
 
4
•••
It is not just Spamhaus... they use many 3rd-party BLs...
I have seen tons serverHold domains in Afilias TLDs - and they are NOT listed in Spamhaus DBL.

Just 1 example, check UKH.ME at https://www.spamhaus.org/lookup/
It is NOT blacklisted by Spamhaus but blocked by Afilias (serverHold).
 
0
•••
And only Afilias completely relies on 3rd-parties...
This only one reason is absolutely enough for their bots, no any human factor there, no any investigation for each case...
Just detected by bot - and then silently blocked.
I have never seen such idiotic practice from Verisign, Donuts, Neustar, CentralNic etc. Only Afilias does it.
 
0
•••
Only Afilias does it.
I tried to find what exactly the problem with ukh.me might be - but, on a spot view, found nothing. It may well be that the lists incorrectly used in current setup do include some other lists, not publicly known. Or, did you try to change whois for new domains you purchase? They might well mark you (as per whois) as an evil spammer after the 1st domain blocked :( - so all your afilias domains may be under radar now. And, in any case, technical subcontractors (with all their automation) is not an issue here. Administration and policies / politics is.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
The mentioned domain is not mine.
I just detected it when checking WHOIS... as tons of other domains (of another domainers too), including even on Sedo and Dan.

Regarding my own 13 blocked domains - they were just registered and parked.
And only 1 of 13 was listed in Spamhaus DBL.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
The mentioned domain is not mine.
But, if it is not yours - we should not use it here as an example for any purpose. We do not know what really happened with this domain, how and why. There may be legitimate reasons to assign serverhold status. It exists in the registries, so, indeed, there are legitimate reasons to assign it in appropriate cases.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
For all my own 13 victims - the response from Afilias was the same: "spam activity".
And that's all, no any other details, just formal reply from those idiots.
I spent weeks of my time to unblock them.

During my domain life I have registered thousands of NON-Afilias domains and parked them in the same way - and 0.00 victims.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
There may be legitimate reasons to assign serverhold status.
Certainly, in theory.
But actual methods (practice) of Afilias are real nightmare.

And they don't set any labels on registrants... because majority of my other Afilias domains - weren't blocked.
They just block what they see in 3rd-party BLs.
 
0
•••
I recheck/scan all my Afilias domains monthly... To detect new victims...
Because no other way. Full silence, no any notifications.
Many domainers even don't know that their domains were blocked... and live with blocked domains...
Some of them read my posts and few DAN domains were already unblocked by those domainers, but most - NO.
 
1
•••
Probably, you will see Afilias on NamesCon soon...
And then you may ask them face2face: when this domain terror will finish?
 
Last edited:
1
•••
U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., with Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., questioned whether nonprofit groups, free speech and internet users would be harmed selling control of .ORG domains to a private equity firm, in a letter sent Dec 23.

read more (senate gov) download letter PDF
 
5
•••
U.S. Sens.
Possibly the only "force" that may stop the sale. I mean U.S. government intervention. Or, a deep investigation of ICANN and of all their "non-profit" activities...
 
5
•••
Back