SPAM-LOW: Re: Petition to form a new ICANN constituency

[Rosemary Sinclair]

Do we need to go back to our Membership Categories?

I don't think we are reflecting Robin's understanding in our Proposed Charter

On the other hand I don't know if CSG would welcome NFP organisations?

More to think about

Cheers

Rosemary
Sent from my BlackBerry® from Optus

-----Original Message-----
From: "Robin Gross" <robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG>
Sender: "NCSG-NCUC" <NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 08:00:59 
To: <NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Reply-To: "Robin Gross" <robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG>
Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: Petition to form a new ICANN constituency

Whether of not NPOC's particular organizations are organized as nonprofits is only the first question.  

The 2nd question is:  Are the policy goals the org (NPOC in this case) wants to achieve commercial in nature?  Trademark rights are generally considered commercial rights (intended to prevent consumer confusion among competing brands regardless of who holds them).  Nonprofits are legally entitled to own trademark rights and I don't think anyone quibbles with that.  But the specific advancement of trademark rights (whether done by an entity legally classified as commercial or noncommercial) is commercial activity that belongs in the CSG.

NCSG is the only place at ICANN that is supposed to be driven solely by concerns OTHER THAN commercial concerns.  All of the other constituencies in GNSO are driven by commercial concerns. The specific design of ICANN was to too keep at least one space clear of concerns OTHER THAN commercial concerns to enter the policy process.

I don't think anyone has a problem with these entities advocating for commercial positions at ICANN.  It just needs to be done in the appropriate space - the CSG.

Best,
Robin

On Nov 9, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Rosemary Sinclair wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> 
> For me the distinction is that "Vodafone" is driven by its owners/shareholders to make profits - there is a huge and very clear distinction between for profit and not for profit organisations in my view having worked for both.
> 
> Its Foundation etc would  be there because of current "good corporate practice" to demonstrate Corporate Social Responsibility in its Annual Report
> 
> cheers
> 
> Rosemary
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NCSG-NCUC on behalf of Nuno Garcia
> Sent: Wed 11/10/2010 2:45 AM
> To: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Subject: Re: Petition to form a new ICANN constituency
> 
> Avri. you are looking at both organizations the way they want you to.
> Vodafone, as many other companies has a foundation that helps needed people,
> and I'm pretty sure that you would agree that some salaries and benefits
> from Red Cross executives can touch the limit of the obscene.
> 
> When you look under the hood, you may find out that the differences are not
> that significative.
> 
> Please note, I'm not against companies having foundations or profits, nor
> against Red Cross paying its employees, far from that. Its just that holding
> a decision position may not be compatible with some naif points of view.
> 
> And I would say that our different points of view are quite clear by now on
> this issue.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Nuno
> 
> On 9 November 2010 14:36, Avri Doria <avri at ltu.se> wrote:
> 
> > On 9 Nov 2010, at 05:18, Nuno Garcia wrote:
> >
> > > Red Cross, for one. How can one distinguish Red Cross from, let us say,
> > Vodafone? Probably the single point of distinction is that Red Cross does
> > accept volunteer work (and Vodafone does not). And of course, the types of
> > services they render (but this distinguishes all other organizations,
> > right?). Yet, they only render services to the communities that are their
> > target if and when someone funds these services.
> > >
> >
> >
> > I think that the distinction are far greater that that.
> >
> > On sells a commercial service and is oriented to making profits for
> > investors but charging customers fees and they provide a service based on an
> > agreement with customers.
> >
> > The other has a mission of helping people in disastrous situations and gets
> > it work done by asking for donations and  provide a service based on dire
> > need.
> >
> > I have no problem telling the difference between them.
> >
> > a.
> >
> 
> 




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/20101109/65025ae0/attachment.html>