Discuss mailing list

[Peter McCann <mccap AT freeovernetfoundation.org>]

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Brian Koontz <brian AT pongonova.net> wrote:
>
> If anything, maybe what OpenNIC needs is an OpenNIC Foundation:  A
> legal entity that can represent OpenNIC (if the membership choses for
> it to do so), maintain funds and donations for OpenNIC operations, and
> make recommendations to the membership concerning the continued
> operations of OpenNIC.

If I may comment, I think what you are suggesting here is not a
corporation but rather a charitable Trust.  A Trust is a very old
institution recognized in English common law (since the crusades,
I believe) and it does not require any specific registration with a
government entity.  You just need to create a trust declaration,
decide what assets to put in the trust initially, and have the initial
set of trustees sign the document in the presence of a notary
public.

Courts do have the power to modify trust documents in certain
cases and can sometimes remove and appoint trustees.  They also
have the power to decide whether a trust is truly a charitable entity
(just saying so in your trust document is not enough).  Charitable
trusts have certain advantages over other kinds of trusts in that they
can exist in perpetuity.

The ability to receive tax-deductible contributions is something that
the IRS decides on a case by case basis.  The easiest way to get
their approval is by chartering a 501c3 corporation but then you get
yourself under government jurisdiction right from the start.

If you want to look at some example documents, the IETF has a trust
document which you can read here:

http://iaoc.ietf.org/docs/IETF-Trust-Agreement-Executed-12-15-05.pdf

The J. Paul Getty trust also makes its founding document available
online:

http://www.getty.edu/about/governance/pdfs/indenture.pdf

Interestingly, that document contains the later modifications by California
courts.

My own attempt at such a document for the Free Overnet Foundation
is linked to here:

https://freeovernetfoundation.org/blog/2010/01/04/draft-trust-declaration/

Feel free to grab any text from there that you think might be useful.  (note
this document has not yet been formally executed so isn't currently in
force).

> If the foundation was established as an
> organization with advisory capacity only, it would serve no purpose to
> try and bring down the foundation, as the decentralized operations of
> OpenNIC would continue to thrive.
>
> I'm also beginning to rethink my position on servers not being
> anonymous.  So long as servers pass the various tests thrown at them
> to ensure they are resolving (and not sending out malicious query
> results), who cares who owns/operates them?  A bad T2 just gets
> removed from the list.

I think you are coming up against the fundamental tension between
privacy and accountability that will come up again and again.  Personally,
I think that people should be findable if they misbehave, but you need
an organization that will stand up and protect the anonymity of its members
when needed.

> The more I think about it, the more I believe the Robin had it right
> the first time around.  There is something to be said for a
> decentralized anarchy of nameservers.

You still need someone to adjudicate the votes.  I think the current informal
structure will start to show strains if this organization begins to grow.

-Pete