Critics of Dot-Org Sale Dismiss Promises Made by For-Profit Buyer

Activists critical of a proposed sale of the organization behind the internet’s dot-org domain said “accountability initiatives” recently announced by the buyers, including a cap on price increases, don’t go far enough.

“The deal suffers several serious flaws, yet its purported fixes are just hollow words,” said Rick Cohen, chief operating officer at the National Council of Nonprofits, in an email to the Chronicle of Philanthropy.

Ethos Capital, the private-equity firm trying to buy the nonprofit behind the internet’s dot-org domain, released a list of initiatives Friday intended to quell opposition to the sale. Ethos said it would limit price increases on dot-org domains for charities and others to no more than an average of 10 percent annually for the next eight years.

However, the initiatives announced by Ethos did little to dispel nonprofits’ concerns about price hikes and the potential for censorship.

The changes announced by Ethos “do not provide the protections and security that the community has been asking for over the last three months,” said Amy Sample Ward, chief executive officer of nonprofit advocacy group NTEN, in a statement released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

In an emailed response, Ethos called the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s position “unfortunate.”

“Ethos has backed its promises and has shown it intends to be a responsible, long-term steward of .org,” the email says. “Ethos understands that it is impossible to satisfy everyone’s specific agendas, but we are confident that our actions have demonstrated our resolve to work with and support the community.”

The $1.1 billion sale of the nonprofit called Public Interest Registry, the organization that manages dot-org domain infrastructure, to Ethos Capital has been hotly debated since it was announced in November 2019.

Ethos has tried to frame the sale as an opportunity to improve the dot-org domain with private investment, and it has accused critics of spreading misinformation about the sale, which still must be endorsed by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or Icann.

Ethos has called for the creation of a Stewardship Council that would have veto power within Public Interest Registry over matters of censorship and user data. It said the agreement would be “legally binding.”

Cohen wrote that he has no confidence that nonprofits would be protected by the steps Ethos outlined. He said he doubts that Icann would enforce the agreement. He added that Ethos and Icann “could tear up the agreement at any time and the nonprofit community would have no recourse.”

Cohen also noted the new terms still give Ethos leeway to raise prices for eight years before those limits expire and give Ethos the exclusive power to nominate individuals to the Stewardship Council.

“These aren’t solutions to the issues raised by the global nonprofit community. They are misdirection and sleight of hand,” said Cohen.