[npoc-voice] Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Notes from NCSG-EC Teleconference on 8 November 2011
Nicolas Adam
nickolas.adam at GMAIL.COM
Tue Nov 15 23:08:53 CET 2011
catching up on a lot of discussion folks. This debate may be more
advance now than I am aware of.
Alain,
Don't make this about "being" or "not being" a *non-profit*. It is about
being or not being *non-commercial*. Non-profit and non-commercial are
objectivaly distinctive. one of the distinction we chose to make was
about the commercial status of the org members themselves, which is a
very objective way to discriminate.
Tell me straight please, would you have wanted to draft rules that would
have enabled Chambers of Commerce to apply for and receive NCSG
membership? This is a trust-building or trust-breaking question as far
as i'm concern. And a fundamental one at that.
Also, why isn't the org in question interested in joining the CSG?
Nicolas
On 14/11/2011 2:27 PM, Alain Berranger wrote:
> Thanks Kelly for putting evidence of USOC's not-for-profit status
> squarely on the table. It is now hoped that the NCSG-Executive
> Committee opponents to USOC's membership will change their minds and
> rally to the NPOC-Executive Committee's recommendation. Kudos to Avri
> for her mature and transparent attitude!
>
> I sincerely hope future discussions about pending and new NPOC members
> will be based solely on evidence, ie. facts verifiable by an
> independant and uninterested third party. Let it be clear, once again,
> that the NPOC Constituency will accept only non-commercial members,
> thus facilitating the work of the NCSG-Executive Committee on
> admission to the Stakeholders' Group.
>
> Best, Alain
>
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Kelly Maser <Kelly.Maser at usoc.org
> <mailto:Kelly.Maser at usoc.org>> wrote:
>
> Thank you to Alain for speaking up to discuss why the U.S. Olympic
> Committee is truly a non-profit entity. The USOC and its
> predecessor organizations have been responsible for overseeing
> amateur sports in this country, not just at the elite level but
> also encouraging sports, healthy lifestyles, competition and fair
> play at the grassroots levels as well. The USOC has many member
> organizations, some of which are community-based organizations
> such as the YMCA or Boys and Girls Clubs of America, the Girl
> Scouts, etc. But the primary members are the National Governing
> Bodies ("NGBs") for the individual sports (/e.g., /USA Track &
> Field, USA Swimming, U.S. Ski and Snowboard Association, U.S.
> Figure Skating, U.S. Tennis Association). The majority of the
> USOC's budget goes to support athletes, either through direct
> grants or through funding the NGBs. The USOC also provides
> support to the NGBs (and their athletes) in terms of governance
> support, coaching assistance, sports medicine, sports psychology
> and the like. The USOC also operates three U.S. Olympic Training
> Centers where thousands of athletes train each year. Here are a
> few statistics for you:
>
> For example, from 2002-2010, these fees were used to assist the
> USOC in:
>
> (a) annually hosting approximately 25,000 athletes,
> coaches, officials and program staff for the National Governing
> Bodies ("NGBs") for the individual Olympic sports at its three
> Olympic training centers (located in Chula Vista, California,
> Colorado Springs, Colorado and Lake Placid, New York) and at its
> U.S. Olympic Education Center in Marquette, Michigan, at a cost of
> $360 million over that period;
>
> (b) providing support to and sending elite U.S. athletes
> and teams to national and international competitions, most notably
> the Olympic Games, at a cost of $80 million;
>
> (c) working with local communities and 19 different NGBs on behalf
> of the Community Olympic Development Programs in Atlanta, Georgia;
> Chicago, Illinois; Springfield, Missouri; Moorestown, New Jersey;
> San Antonio, Texas; Verona, Wisconsin; and Park City and Kearns,
> Utah;
>
> (d) directing over $160 million in grants and services
> to athletes, including monetary stipends, health services and
> benefits, educational grants, and more;
>
> (e) providing additional support to 47 different
> National Governing Bodies in the form of NGB Programs and Services
> including sport performance, coaching assistance, sports medicine,
> sports science and organizational support, at a cost of $235
> million; and
>
> (f) funding the USOC's many other statutory functions.
>
> Please let me know if there are other questions that I could help
> answer.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Kelly**
>
> **
>
> *Kelly Maser **| Associate General Counsel|****United States
> Olympic Committee****|****Office**: 719.866.4115
> <tel:719.866.4115> |****Cell**: 719.330.0266 <tel:719.330.0266>
> |****Fax**: 719.866.4839 <tel:719.866.4839> | kelly.maser at usoc.org
> <mailto:kelly.maser at usoc.org>** |****www.teamusa.org
> <http://www.teamusa.org>*
>
> *From:*owner-npoc-voice at icann.org
> <mailto:owner-npoc-voice at icann.org>
> [mailto:owner-npoc-voice at icann.org
> <mailto:owner-npoc-voice at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Alain Berranger
> *Sent:* Saturday, November 12, 2011 3:09 PM
> *To:* Avri Doria
> *Cc:* NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu
> <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>; npoc-voice at icann.org
> <mailto:npoc-voice at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [npoc-voice] Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Notes from NCSG-EC
> Teleconference on 8 November 2011
>
> Thks Avri,
>
> I have no appetite for minority appeal that I cannot hope to win
> under current membership mindset, sense of entitlement,
> grand-fathering, numbers and distribution... but NPOC colleagues
> may decide differently.
>
> I think we need in general to follow evidence-based membership
> criteria and follow the same criteria for all. So my 4 arguments
> remain as far as I am concerned and can be verified by evidence
> (facts) not opinion, hearsay, bias, etc...
>
> Different strokes for different folks? For instance, how can we
> have NCUC/NCSG individual members working for a law firm or a
> telecom company? but we do. The NPOC membership is clear: all are
> not-for-profit and only play one side of the street.
>
> To the risk of repeating myself, national olympic committees are
> not-for-profits working year in and year out for athletes and not
> to be confused with the games organizing committees which are for
> profit (or at least not for loss) once in a blue moon when the
> country is awarded the games...
>
> For instance re London 2012: one needs to distingush between the
> games organizers - http://www.london2012.*com*/
> <http://www.london2012.com/> which is for profit and get sponsors
> to support the 2012 games and the UK Olympic committee which every
> year supports UK athletes and get sponsors to support athletes-
> http://www.olympics.*org*.uk/ <http://www.olympics.org.uk/>
>
> Alain
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Assuming there are 14 members who agree with your position, the
> charter has provision for an appeal process that includes the
> possibility of taking it to a full membership vote if the
> difference of opinion cannot be resolved.
>
> > 1. Any decision of the NCSG-EC can be appealed by requesting a
> full vote of the NCSG membership. There are several ways in which
> an appeal can be initiated:
> >
> > · If 15 NCSG members, consisting of both organizational and
> individual members, request such an appeal the NCSG Executive
> Committee will first take the appeal under consideration.
> >
> > · If, after consideration of any documentation provided by
> those making the appeal, the NCSG-EC does not reverse its
> decision, the NCSG-EC and those making the appeal should attempt
> to negotiate a mutually agreeable solution.
> >
> > · If the NCSG-EC and those making the appeal cannot reach a
> mutually acceptable agreement on the decision within 30 days, then
> an NCSG vote will be scheduled as soon as practicable.
> >
> > · For this type of appeal to succeed 60% of all of the NCSG
> members must approve of the appeal in a full membership vote as
> defined in section 4.0.
>
>
> Some comments below.
>
>
> On 12 Nov 2011, at 15:16, Alain Berranger wrote:
>
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > I want to state I disagree with the decision to exclude the
> USOC. For 4 reasons:
> >
> > 1) Its vision: to enable America's athletes to realize their
> Olympic and Paralympic dreams.
>
> That is its vision, but it is debatable that is main purpose is to
> administer commercial licensing agreement. Or at least this
> seems to be the resumption of those who voted against their
> membership.
>
> The charter indicates:
> "3. Is engaged in online activities that are primarily
> noncommercial, including, e.g., advocacy, educational, religious,
> human rights, charitable, scientific and artistic, and"
>
> So the question is, what are its primary activities, granting
> licenses or supporting athletes. I have certainly heard arguments
> on both sides of this issue, and personally think it is a toss up.
> For example, it is well known that most olympians have to find
> their own funding in the US. This varies by country, but in the
> US, the US Olympic Committee does not support athletes as far as I
> have been able to discover. So what do they do beyond sanction
> events and licensing?
>
>
>
> > 2) its mission: To support U.S. Olympic and Paralympic athletes
> in achieving sustained competitive excellence and preserve the
> Olympic ideals, and thereby inspire all Americans.
> >
> > 3) It is a not-for-profit with IRS exemption under 501 c 3
>
> As the charter indicates, being not-for-profit is not sufficient.
> For example the Chamber of Commerce in not-for-profit and yet
> obviously not a non-commercial entity. Specifically:
>
> "4. In the case of a membership-based organization, the
> organization should not only be noncommercial itself, but should
> have a primarily noncommercial focus, and the membership should
> also be primarily composed of noncommercial members. (E.g., a
> chamber of commerce, though it may be a noncommercial organization
> itself, and might even have some noncommercial members, is
> primarily composed of commercial organizations and has a
> commercial focus and would not be eligible for membership.)"
>
> So the question becomes, who are the principles members? I do not
> know the answer to this.
>
> avri
>
>
> >
> > 4) fundraising is an activity of all not-for-profits, including
> sponsoring, and thus does not make a not-for-profit a commercial
> organization. I think you are confusing the USOC per se with the
> various olympic games hosting organizations set up for Lake
> Placid, Los Angeles games, etc...
> >
> > Alain
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Robin Gross
> <robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>> wrote:
> > The new NCSG Executive Committee held its first tele-conference
> on Tuesday and we made great progress, particularly with respect
> to establishing a process for handling NCSG membership
> applications and dealing with the NPOC applications that had come
> in since the election. So below are my notes from the EC
> meeting's discussion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Robin
> >
> > NCSG-EC Teleconference - 8 Nov. 2011
> > Transcript & mp3 recording:
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Meetings
> > Attendance: Michael Carson, Rafik Dammak, Robin Gross, Milton
> Mueller, Klaus Stoll
> > NCSG-EC Mtg Discussion Agenda:
> >
> > - Review of NCSG membership application procedures
> >
> > - Review of pending NCSG membership applications
> >
> > - Establishment of NCSG Financial Committee
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------
> >
> > MEETING NOTES:
> >
> > These 8 orgs were approved for NCSG membership:
> > ALSAC / St. Jude
> > Australian RedCross Society
> > Church of God in Christ
> > Goodwill Industries
> > International Baccalaureate Organization
> > The Association of NGOs, The Gambia (TANGO)
> > Water Environment Research Foundation
> > YMCA of The Gambia
> >
> > These 3 orgs were determined ineligible for NCSG membership:
> > 1. Kaswesha Community Resource Center
> > Reason provided for non-approval: Not the exclusive user of at
> least one domain name (a requirement for eligibility under NCSG
> Charter Section 2.2.1).
> > They were invited to re-apply when they have a noncommercial
> domain name.
> >
> > 2. Civil Society Movement Against Tuberculosis in Sierre
> Leone (CISMAT-SL)
> > Reason provided for non-approval: Not the exclusive user of at
> least one domain name (a requirement for eligibility under NCSG
> Charter Section 2.2.1).
> > They were invited to re-apply when they have a noncommercial
> domain name.
> >
> > 3. US Olympic Committee:
> > Reason provided for non-approval: USOC is substantially a major
> sports licensing business and NCSG is devoted to the protection of
> noncommercial interests.
> > They were invited to join ICANN's Intellectual Property
> Constituency as the more appropriate place to protect their interests.
> >
> > These 7 orgs are undergoing further evaluation:
> > Child Protection Alliance
> > Information Technology Association of the Gambia
> > National Coalition for the Homeless
> > National Grange of the Order of Patrons of Husbandry
> > Pilots N Paws
> > Tranquil Space Foundation
> > Young Life
> >
> >
> > ** Attached to this email is a flow chart to explain the agreed
> process for handling NCSG Membership Applications going forward.
> >
> > A few notes on the procedures for handling NCSG Membership
> Applications:
> >
> > Completed NCSG Membership applications should be submitted by
> the Applicant to the email address join-ncsg at ipjustice.org
> <mailto:join-ncsg at ipjustice.org> for consideration by the entire
> NCSG Executive Committee.
> >
> > NCSG-NCUC Membership application forms are available on the NCSG
> wiki (for individuals and for organizations).
> >
> > Members of the NCSG-EC have 2 weeks to conduct the required due
> diligence on the applications (more flexible if a holiday).
> >
> > Decisions to approve membership applications require the full
> consensus of the voting members of the NCSG Executive Committee
> (NCSG Charter 2.4.2).
> >
> > Verification of a named official representative's authority to
> represent an organizational applicant should be independently
> verified by the EC (NSCG Charter 2.2.4.1).
> >
> > Aggregate voting / representation is not permitted for
> organizations. Each organization must be represented by a
> different person. No single person (or group of persons, i.e., a
> law firm) can represent two or more organizations in NCSG at the
> same time. This policy discourages attempts to game the system
> through aggregating membership votes.
> >
> > Organizations with a nonprofit legal structure are nonetheless
> ineligible for membership in NCSG if they are substantially a
> commercial or business activity and their interests are more
> appropriately represented in one of the commercial stakeholder
> groups (NCSG Charter 2.2.2).
> >
> > An organization's official representative to NCSG cannot be a
> GNSO Council Representative for the Intellectual Property
> Constituency (or other officer or member of the IPC or CSG).
> Outside trademark lawyers are discouraged as the official
> representative for an org to NCSG since NCSG is devoted to
> protecting noncommercial interests.
> >
> > ON A SEPARATE ISSUE:
> > The EC is in the process of establishing a NCSG Financial
> Committee (as per NCSG Charter 2.1. & 2.6.) and is looking for
> volunteers from among the NCSG membership - people with
> fundraising expertise and time to devote to NCSG fundraising
> activities and ICANN resource allocations. So please let an EC
> member know if you'd like to be considered for membership on the
> NCSG Financial Committee. Thank you!
> > --------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > IP JUSTICE
> > Robin Gross, Executive Director
> > 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
> > p: +1-415-553-6261 <tel:%2B1-415-553-6261> f: +1-415-462-6451
> <tel:%2B1-415-462-6451>
> > w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin at ipjustice.org
> <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> > Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> > Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
> www.schulich.yorku.ca <http://www.schulich.yorku.ca>
> > NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
> <http://www.chasquinet.org>
> > interim Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
> > O:+1 514 484 7824 <tel:%2B1%20514%20484%207824>; M:+1 514 704
> 7824 <tel:%2B1%20514%20704%207824>
> > Skype: alain.berranger
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
>
> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> <http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
>
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
> www.schulich.yorku.ca <http://www.schulich.yorku.ca>
>
> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
> <http://www.chasquinet.org>
> interim Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
> O:+1 514 484 7824 <tel:%2B1%20514%20484%207824>; M:+1 514 704 7824
> <tel:%2B1%20514%20704%207824>
> Skype: alain.berranger
>
>
>
>
> --
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> <http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
> www.schulich.yorku.ca <http://www.schulich.yorku.ca>
> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
> <http://www.chasquinet.org>
> interim Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
> Skype: alain.berranger
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20111115/8dbc25a4/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list