EFF: .Org Sale 'Threatens Instability and Dysfunction' (eff.org)
26
In a scathing editorial, EFF continues to oppose Ethos Capital's plan to buy the PIR's .org domain registry for $1.1 billion, arguing that "the current system is stable and functional, and changing it threatens to introduce instability and dysfunction with no countervailing benefit to the community..."
"[W]hile there is nothing currently wrong with .ORG, there is a lot that could go wrong if this deal moves forward." Ethos and PIR have repeatedly defended the proposed deal by arguing that converting PIR to a privately owned, for-profit enterprise will allow it to offer "new products and services," but without explaining what those new offerings might be. On Thursday, they finally admitted that they actually don't know what additional products and services .ORG registrants want or need, citing a lack of market research...
The for-profit PIR that Ethos envisions would be a fundamentally different organization than today's PIR, and we have serious concerns about its business model and financial stability. Nothing we've heard from PIR and Ethos has convinced us that PIR should be transformed from something that we all know works to something that's unproven. To the contrary, the Ethos deal raises concrete dangers of censorship, financial and technical instability, and price-gouging of non-commercial .ORG registrants. And despite making their case for months, proponents of the deal haven't identified any specific benefits it would impart to .ORG users.
ICANN can, and should, reject this change to the .ORG registry. But that time is running out; ICANN's current deadline to make a decision is Friday, March 20. You can still speak out: the ICANN Board is holding a public forum next week, Monday March 9 at 10am-11:30am Eastern Daylight Time. Anyone can join by videoconference and address the Board.
"[W]hile there is nothing currently wrong with .ORG, there is a lot that could go wrong if this deal moves forward." Ethos and PIR have repeatedly defended the proposed deal by arguing that converting PIR to a privately owned, for-profit enterprise will allow it to offer "new products and services," but without explaining what those new offerings might be. On Thursday, they finally admitted that they actually don't know what additional products and services .ORG registrants want or need, citing a lack of market research...
The for-profit PIR that Ethos envisions would be a fundamentally different organization than today's PIR, and we have serious concerns about its business model and financial stability. Nothing we've heard from PIR and Ethos has convinced us that PIR should be transformed from something that we all know works to something that's unproven. To the contrary, the Ethos deal raises concrete dangers of censorship, financial and technical instability, and price-gouging of non-commercial .ORG registrants. And despite making their case for months, proponents of the deal haven't identified any specific benefits it would impart to .ORG users.
ICANN can, and should, reject this change to the .ORG registry. But that time is running out; ICANN's current deadline to make a decision is Friday, March 20. You can still speak out: the ICANN Board is holding a public forum next week, Monday March 9 at 10am-11:30am Eastern Daylight Time. Anyone can join by videoconference and address the Board.
Nothing good will come of this (Score:2)
Nothing good will come of this, except more revenue from some dickweed organization who will inevitably charge people more for an ".org" domain.
Re: (Score:1)
> inevitably charge people more for an ".org" domain.
The onus is on the naysayers to show why this is different than .com, .net, or all of the other cheap TLD's.
So far it's all conspiracy theories. Of course any Hollywood Movie Plot *could* happen but in the real world we talk about what *would most likely* happen.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
This is incredibly deceitful, it is too often that the corporate world gets out of control and indulges their most greedy and selfish impulses.
Re: (Score:2)
The original intent of .org was important. But that was long ago, in a very different internet. That internet is long dead, much though I miss it. These days? Who cares, everything is spam.
Re:Nothing good will come of this (Score:4, Interesting)
Why isn't the onus on the people-wanting-to-change-the-status-quo, to show why this will improve anything for anyone who is not affiliated with Ethos Capital?
Are there super-secret magical economies of scale that will radically disrupt the .org domain market? Couldn't Ethos Capital explain those to us mere mortals?
Re: (Score:3)
So far it's all conspiracy theories. Of course any Hollywood Movie Plot *could* happen but in the real world we talk about what *would most likely* happen.
Holy fuckballs, did you get infected with the SuperKendall Bullshit Brain Disease too?
I know, the very idea that a for-profit company would use this as an opportunity to raise rates is just crazy, isn't it? I mean, who wants to make more money for doing exactly nothing? Certainly not a company that just spent 1.1 billion to acquire an asset, noooooooooo.
Re:Nothing good will come of this (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Why change a system that's working fine? Change for change's sake is seldom an improvement.
2) And most importantly, why would someone want to buy the
The internet domain system is a public resource and to the extent possible it should remain public, with as little interference from government and corporations as we can practically manage.
Re: (Score:2)
EFF is a good org, and they have almost always been right about things like this.
Re: (Score:3)
Precedent? Worst case scenario? (Score:3)
Can someone here give an example worst-case scenario of this sale being allowed to proceed, from the perspective of a
Re: (Score:3)
IIRC, Verisgin bought the TLD .com. The agreed to a rate freeze of five years when they did so. That expired, and they started by raising rates by 25%.
This is all from memory, so I may be off.
Re: (Score:2)
Now is not the time for rate hikes.
That comes later.
Re:Precedent? Worst case scenario? (Score:4, Interesting)
It might be interesting to look at what's happened with some of the new TLDs. One DNS provider, which is usually known for somewhat discounted rates, is asking $2399.95 per year to renew .car and .auto TLDs. Source: https://www.domainmonger.com/register-domain/ [domainmonger.com]. You can see that renewal prices vary all over the place depending on TLD, with prices presumably marked up from the wholesale price the TLD registry owner decides to charge.
I'm sure Ethos Capital is looking at numbers like that and salivating. Their primary goal will be to recoup their $1.1 billion then maximize profits. If not-so-rich .org's have to drop their domain names because they can't afford renewals, so be it, as long as enough richer .org's make up for it at the peak of the profit vs price curve.
I think Ethos has promised to limit price increases to 10% per year for the first few years as an incentive for the deal to go through, there's no telling what will happen after that. Even 10% is far faster than inflation. And shouldn't prices be going down? Just what work is involved in maintaining a database with 10 million .org records, which (as I understand it) is mostly kept updated with automated feeds from DNS service providers?
(BTW I wonder what PIR's plan is for the $1.1 billion they'll get.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: EFF (Score:1)
"pointing out alternatives that can't be controlled by shitty organizations"
Like, say, a domain space managed by a non profit that is designated for non profits?
I wonder how we could set something like that up...
Anyone with a .org, renew now for 10 years (Score:4, Interesting)
This smacks of land grab greed to me.
The domain name industry has been struggling for years, simply due to less demand.
The way we consume the internet has changed radically. Browsers and search engines have put domain names right in the background.
When was the last time you actually bothered to enter a domain name in a browser?
To try and milk more cash out of a failing cash cow, to get that tired golden chicken to lay more golden eggs, the industry went gTLD crazy.
They were convinced - stupidly so - that a stack load of new domain suffixes would surely be snatched up by businesses and individuals.
It just didn't happen. The market wasn't there anymore.
So what market remains? - Renewals.
That's where the bulk of the money now sits - that and bolt on services sold by Registrars.
It is a 100% certainty that whoever ends up running the .org Registry will ramp the prices of renewals up.
The domain industry is ripe for disruption, there are just so many shysters in this game - heck, it's virtually 100% full of scumbags trying to wring the last bit of money out of an industry that has been gouging the public for decades.
Re: Anyone with a .org, renew now for 10 years (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What a joke (Score:2)
A firm that either makes tons of money for nothing or just torpedoes the company if the huge profits are not there. Next thing you know is the
So want to understand this, see who is getting their bank accounts buffed in a very very healthy way.
Question? Are not the
Two oldest professions known to mankind (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
War.
War never changes.
Public forum is biased (Score:1)
I've spoken up on the ICANN public forum emphasizing the importance of getting this deal right. A lot can be said what's wrong. When I tried to commend Ethos capital on what they are actually doing right (Being a value based company) the record will show that I got cut off.
I would like to ask for your opinions. How do I best raise this issue?
My full take on the matter can be found here:
http://roguestars.me/The-ethos... [roguestars.me]
I want to move forward on speaking out on this case. Add your voice to mine and let's crea