Skip to main content

Future Foundation Model

Phase 4 of the Ecosystem Roadmap envisions a mature, multi-stakeholder ecosystem where PTI stewardship is anchored in an independent foundation rather than a single commercial operator.

This document describes a target model for discussion — not an incorporated entity today. Specific legal form SHOULD be chosen with counsel in relevant jurisdictions.

Why a foundation

Risk without foundationMitigation
Steward acquisition shifts prioritiesAsset lock-in and mission charter
Trademark captureFoundation-owned marks with public policy
Specification fork on vendor exitNeutral home for RFC IP and test suites
Weak institutional trustMulti-seat board with implementer and public interest

Foundations succeed when they steward assets, not when they operate production trust platforms.

Design principles for Phase 4

Adapted from mature open ecosystems without copying a single template:

  1. Mission lock — Charter prioritizes vendor-neutral specification stewardship
  2. Minimal operational scope — No mandatory cloud; optional shared test infrastructure only
  3. Multi-stakeholder board — Implementers, users, academia, public interest
  4. Transparent funding — Dues and grants disclosed; no pay-to-play RFC votes
  5. Trademark clarity — Certification marks owned by foundation (Trademark and Branding)
  6. Implementer freedomBuild Your Own PTI remains unrestricted

Proposed structure

Board composition (illustrative)

Seat typeCountSelection
Implementers3Elected by certified implementers
Institutional users2Elected by user council
Public interest / privacy2Nominated by civil-society shortlist
Academic1Rotating appointment
Founding steward alumni1Transitional ≤5 years

No single organization SHOULD hold >20% board votes.

Assets to transfer

AssetNotes
Trademark portfolioPTI™, certification marks
RFC publication infrastructureRepo, website, archival
Conformance test suitesCanonical test IP
Security disclosure programSRG charter and contacts
Endowment or funding agreementsMulti-year runway target

Commercial product code (e.g., TumiTrust) MAY remain with respective companies under separate licenses.

Membership and funding

Individual participation in Working Group MUST remain free.

Organizational membership MAY fund:

  • Test infrastructure and CI
  • Legal and trademark maintenance
  • Interoperability events
  • Administrative staff (minimal)

Membership MUST NOT purchase:

  • RFC approval votes
  • Exclusive certification rights
  • Mandatory implementer licensing

Relationship to existing bodies

FunctionPhase 4 home
RFC processFoundation-hosted Working Group
CertificationFoundation CPB + accredited labs
Reference implementationsIndependent vendors (including TumiTrust)
Production registriesOperators — not foundation

Transition triggers

Foundation formation SHOULD begin when at least three conditions are met:

  1. ≥3 independently certified implementations across ≥2 legal jurisdictions
  2. ≥12 months of public Working Group elections
  3. Documented annual budget and trademark inventory
  4. Signed letter of intent from ≥5 funding members for 3-year runway
  5. Working Group supermajority vote to proceed

Until then, founder stewardship continues under published governance.

Alternatives considered

ModelBenefitDrawback
Hosted at existing standards bodyLegal maturitySlower, less domain focus
Consortium with paywallFast fundingWeak public trust
Informal GitHub org foreverLow overheadTrademark and liability gaps
Independent foundationNeutral long-term homeSetup cost

PTI SHOULD prefer independent foundation unless a compelling hosted-deal preserves neutrality and speed.

Next steps (pre-Phase 4)

  1. Publish annual stewardship transparency report
  2. Grow independent implementer council
  3. Draft foundation charter for public comment
  4. Engage legal counsel on trademark transfer
  5. Pilot elected Maintainer process