Re: [Iasa20] Memo exploring options for IASA 2.0 models

Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org> Wed, 14 February 2018 23:48 UTC

Return-Path: <jhall@cdt.org>
X-Original-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E8A126DFB for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:48:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cdt.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L4caczORM-RQ for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:48:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vk0-x22c.google.com (mail-vk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDD50126C22 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:48:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vk0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id o204so2060925vkd.13 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:48:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cdt.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=osSC2VfNaCP+ugGb0v5MNmVPMpD1kAkTlRh0uogSMEo=; b=bR1W022NZrhHtp+gDouwoF6j5kA2c7ntn5OFw1//SIUb7UZWHbaQZLyDHgZa0tSpkh WHgDjKXVLSf9llK7Xbtzhun7Q07EqiG2Xsk7ZVQ2kQk6DMkUT+vIovx540nuMFSFXNp4 52e1IvhupqK0PampaQ7UM7uV4hGMnsOy2wbRU=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=osSC2VfNaCP+ugGb0v5MNmVPMpD1kAkTlRh0uogSMEo=; b=IUHr8ZkcUzEjeSFRt4v+X3utXUGLipUOjhF5+5PfoUCiHZxC3wRB23xy8NnPDIJVdy RbLh6xSZNLO6jfVD8fardcB7DDoG0mka8kxFPgcxC5EftjxdKxRw53L8KFKnW9QuylQE RQYTkwqnnay1G9r6x01svwSxio+acaB0VSOKM+liaT+QzR0VTBz+IEj8DRp8hswJf1rR sMU5m2Fid+KcoI0lhiGm7+O8MRDSwrBoaSBGrRkLD/eplW7P2L0mkrOOr75dgrOWfHp3 a9ycCqcRrfjb6dSn6AYyxdQ3Du7XHxbhwe313XyPr+GhBNSlaL1BuFQ2kI5Kiz9MuTSM WUEQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPBAusIcu1QNCxt+V4HHWZ0D2wps/q1pFs2tWWCwVErHEyapBsJl 1qhMAvm6LgUiBTnDuAQOfQdkFQ8Xjt+KfJWpBBbjHZup
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227el4paJajycDHxdw0CgK6v3fulPDGnqWfDvOhx0jxGiZprWX7XMSrYkSsZVJyE4q9oOnasnp0SMp8QPyMOa+o=
X-Received: by 10.31.207.5 with SMTP id f5mr854893vkg.90.1518652121718; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:48:41 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4483006c-1652-7340-19f8-8d0579af8213@cdt.org> <ac8f3a00-b22a-ff84-ba81-14e824697148@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <ac8f3a00-b22a-ff84-ba81-14e824697148@cs.tcd.ie>
From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 23:48:31 +0000
Message-ID: <CABtrr-Wo7Laxvcvf+rwJ9Yip9-T78tA2dGqborcWd4gt1FM9eQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: iasa20@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114e4eec40b5a5056534c0b3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/i-fR03fUmFD5wrc-AWJLEdSXdF4>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Memo exploring options for IASA 2.0 models
X-BeenThere: iasa20@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions relating to reorganising the IETF administrative structures in the so called “IASA 2.0” project. <iasa20.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iasa20/>
List-Post: <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 23:48:46 -0000

No, we haven't explicitly considered that and this is definitely specific
to US law. Are there promising hybrids you'd suggest, or is this just to
point out (rightly) how complex the design space is?

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 18:44 Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
wrote:

>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I'm generally not in favour of most of the "forming a
> new organisation" propositions, but am nonetheless
> curious as to why all of the options here are US-based.
> Did the DT not consider any other jurisdictions?
>
> Sorry if I'm forgetting if that was previously discussed,
> and it'd be entirely reasonable if this is considered the
> easiest thing to check first, but I wondered.
>
> Ta,
> S.
>
> PS: One of the reasons I'm not that much in favour of
> the "forming a new organisation" options is that that'd
> lead to a bunch of questions like the jurisdiction one,
> each of which may take some time to handle.
>
> On 14/02/18 23:29, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I am writing on behalf of the IASA 2.0 Design Team to update you on
> > progress since Singapore.
> >
> > The Design Team and Alissa, Sean Turner, and Richard Barnes (ISOC Board
> > members) asked ISOC's tax law counsel at the law firm Morgan Lewis to
> > examine the options we are considering in a new IASA 2.0 structure, in
> > terms of governance, finances, and administrative complexity.
> >
> > The response memo is attached, covering the spectrum of options from the
> > status quo to increasingly independent models. The memo covers four
> options:
> >
> > 1. Substantial independence: an independent 501(c)(3) org;
> > 2. Significant independence: a 501(c)(3) Type 1 Supporting Org;
> > 3. Weak independence: an LLC that is a "disregarded entity"; and,
> > 4. Status quo: continuing as an activity of ISOC.
> >
> > Note that the design team has some additional questions that we hope to
> > clarify including the implications of the public support test, board
> > composition and control, and potential costs (sunk/ongoing) of a
> > transition to each model. We'd like to hear from all of you as to your
> > thoughts, either in terms of clarification or if this analysis affects
> > which model you prefer.
> >
> > If questions emerge around particular themes we can work with ISOC on
> > clarifications.
> >
> > thank you,
> >
> > Joe (writing on behalf of the DT)
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > iasa20 mailing list
> > iasa20@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20
> >
>
> --
> PGP key change time for me.
> New-ID 7B172BEA; old-ID 805F8DA2 expires Jan 24 2018.
> NewWithOld sigs in keyservers.
> Sorry if that mucks something up;-)
>
-- 
Joseph Lorenzo Hall
Chief Technologist, Center for Democracy & Technology [https://www.cdt.org]
1401 K ST NW STE 200, Washington DC 20005-3497
e: joe@cdt.org, p: 202.407.8825, pgp: https://josephhall.org/gpg-key
Fingerprint: 3CA2 8D7B 9F6D DBD3 4B10  1607 5F86 6987 40A9 A871