NPOC Q&A Document

[Mary Wong]

I usually hate "me too" postings, but amidst all the email flurry and discussion, I thought I should add that (1) it's actually heartening to see disagreement and consequently constructive discussion among NCSG members, which I hope carries over into healthy, robust and, ultimately, meaningful policy discussions; and (2) I agree completely with Avri and David on the various excellent points they make, particularly in relation to (i) the need to accommodate divergent views within our "broad tent"; (ii) figuring out how best to characterize and, if necessary, distinguish between the various types and configurations of a "non commercial" individual/entity; and (iii) encouraging new constituencies/interest groups/whatever they end up being called, to form and new members to join NCSG.
 
I'm still catching up on all the NPOC documents and emails, but I wondered whether it would be possible at this stage to discuss a more specific and potentially less confusing moniker for the NPOC constituency-in-formation? For instance, would it be useful to partially resuscitate an earlier suggestion made (either by Avri or Bill Drake, I think) that the new constituency be called something along the lines of "Non Profit Community Service Providers"? 
 
Cheers
Mary
 
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAWTwo White StreetConcord, NH 03301USAEmail: mary.wong at law.unh.eduPhone: 1-603-513-5143Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.phpSelected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584

>>> 


From: David Cake <dave at DIFFERENCE.COM.AU>
To:<NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
Date: 11/9/2010 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: NPOC Q&A Document
At 10:28 AM -0500 9/11/10, Avri Doria wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am not personally advocating for thick WHOIS.  I am in fact 
>against it as a matter of personal opinion.
>
>What I am arguing is that the position itself does not make one 
>unqualified for NCSG membership.    I again refer to the model of 
>the NCSG as a broad tent for differing opinions from the 
>non-commercial stakeholders.

I agree with Avri. The NCSG is, and must be, a broad tent, 
because membership is based on organisational structure and goals. 
The two organisations within the NPOC that we know of, the American 
Red Cross and Association of American Medical Colleges, are clearly 
not commercial, and so clearly belong within NCSG.
Not every non-profit organisation belongs in NCSG (Rosemary 
has already nominated ATUG, a NFP with primarily commercial 
membership, I would strongly put organisations such as INTA in that 
same category and absolutely reject their entry into NCSG - not for 
profit and non-commecial are different issues), but there will be 
NCSG members whose policy positions do not happen to agree with 
current NCUC majority/leadership positions, and we have to have 
processes that reflect and embrace that.

I honestly think these organisations belong within NCUC as 
well, despite their policy differences with NCUC majority opinions. I 
do appreciate that this makes things difficult for both NCUC 
leadership and the organisations in question, but I think that is a 
flaw in the Constituency system.


>I do  think, however, that a good debate on the subject of thick 
>WHOIS  is a good thing for the NCSG.  In fact I would love to see 
>more substantive reasoned  debates on  issues like this on the NCSG 
>list.

Absolutely. It is a complex issue, with legitimate concerns 
on both sides. I personally do not favour a thick WHOIS (and any 
version of thick WHOIS that has a chilling effect on legitimate free 
speech is something I would oppose), but I would like to see solid 
policy debate on the issue, and I certainly think NCSG should have 
room for a range of opinions on this issue and others.
Regards
David



As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with the University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of New Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have changed and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname at law.unh.edu. For more information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law, please visit law.unh.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20101110/985ee38b/attachment-0001.html>