ICANN Must Account for its Math

[Mary Wong]

Robin and everyone,
 
My guess is that these constituencies (certainly the IPC and to some extent the BC) will respond by saying, yes but *each* of our members (or some, in the case of the BC) is an association/group that represents many individuals, firms, corporations and organizations. Thus, while our technical member number seem low, the reality is that we have literally thousands of participants in our constituencies and ICANN.
 
While we can and should note that participation via indirect representation is less truly participatory than direct membership (as is the NCUC model), particularly for individuals. Note that only organizational members have the right to vote in the IPC, for instance. I think, however, that we need to recognize that this type of math - however shaky - can at first glance to a hassled and overworked Board member seem accurate and true. 
 
I think the best way we can make our case for diversity and representation is to combine our statistics with the above; i.e. point to our growth, the fact and advantage of direct membership/participation, the lack of barriers in NCUC to individuals voting and so on.
 
BTW, thanks to all who commented on the draft Board letter. I'm making amendments now and will send out a new version as soon as I can.
 
Cheers
Mary
 
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mwong at piercelaw.edu
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584


>>> Robin Gross <robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG> 8/12/2009 12:13 PM >>>
The Facts.

Commercial Stakeholder Group Membership.
According to the Business Constituency's website, they have 44 members ( http://www.bizconst.org/members.htm ).
According to the IPR Constituency's website, they have 18 members ( http://www.ipconstituency.org/membership.htm ).
According to the ISP Constituency's website ( http://www.ispcp.info/ ), (they don't publish membership lists and haven't had a post to their email lis ( http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ispcp/ )t in 2009).  But, according the 2006 LSE Report (the last documented account of the ISP Constituency's membership, they have 42 members.

So if we add the membership of these 3 commercial constituencies together, we get  total of 104 members in the Commercial Stakeholder Group, who will elect 6 GNSO Councilors.

Contrast:
NCUC has 142 members ( http://ncdnhc.org/page/membership-roster ) but noncommercial users will not be allowed to elect any of our new GNSO Councilors on the claim that we are too small to deserve to elect all 6 GNSO Councilors.

Did anyone from ICANN staff/SIC do any math before they ruled non-commercial users are too small to deserve to elect all 6 GNSO Councilors?

  NCSG membership = 142 members (allowed 3 elected representatives)

  CSG membership = 104 members (allowed 6 representatives)

What was the decision-making process that led to ICANN's determination that noncommercial users are too small?  Seriously, we deserve to know how they arrived at that decision and upon what facts the decision was based - it is our elected representation that they are meddling with.  ICANN will have to answer this.



IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090812/e7f79962/attachment.html>