Petition to form a new ICANN constituency

[Nuno Garcia]

I agree.

On 9 November 2010 20:10, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:

> 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/20101109/2dda1944/attachment-0001.html>