impressions and suspicions (was [] elections ...)

[Avri Doria]

On 17 Nov 2011, at 16:54, Dan Krimm wrote:

> There is quite simply an impression floating around NCUC that NPOC exists
> as a sort of "one-issue" group devoted overwhelmingly to advancing
> maximalist trademark policy at ICANN (in opposition to NCUC's historical
> consensus on these issues -- we spent a lot of time and effort fighting
> CSG/BC and IPC on trademark issues, looking for a more balanced approach
> -- I speak as an individual trademark holder, myself), and ultimately
> wouldn't care much about anything else, and may be fairly ruthless in its
> efforts to advance such policy (as other advocates for trademark
> maximalism tend to be).

Well NPOC did support the JAS statement, for which I was grateful, so that begins to tell me they support more that just one issue.
(I do not mean to say that is the only such event, it is just the one that comes immediately to mind)

> 
> There is also suspicion that ICANN staff or others sympathetic to CSG/IPC
> agendas (and correspondingly unsympathetic to NCUC positions) may have put
> these folks up to it, as a specific strategy to dilute, distract, confuse
> or usurp NCSG policy in these matters.  

Of course there are such suspicions and they may even be fact based.  Then again, there could also be suspicions about the NCUC being a typical incumbent  and not wanting to accept any other NC constituencies that did not look exactly like us.

But even if it started that way, I do not think that is either the NPOC or NCUC we have at this point. 
Though there are probably individuals in each who still resemble these old stereotypes.


> After all, as IPC is now part of
> CSG, it seems that is where such advocates ought to belong, in the current
> GNSO taxonomy.


I have never understand this point, though I read and heard many variants of it.  Even though I am a TM minimalist who thinks only neologisms deserve TM protection on the Internet, it seems clear to me that there are both Commercial and Non-Commercial TM concerns. So I see no reason why the NCSG could not have an NCTMC.  I am not saying that this is what NPOC is but I would see no harm in there being such a constituency as long it was composed of people and organizations that met the NCSG membership requirements and that the candidate constituency went through the chartered processes to become a constituency.

avri