I received this from Jefsey. Very strong arguments. I would like the
constituency to take a careful look at it, and the ExecComm to review
its decision to make sure we are not making a wrong decision.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: INTLNET
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:15:38 +0100
From: Jefsey_Morfin <[log in to unmask]>
To: Carlos Afonso <[log in to unmask]>
CC: Frannie Wellings <[log in to unmask]>,Iliya Nickelt <[log in to unmask]>,
Olivier Nana Nzépa <[log in to unmask]>, Marcelo Fernandes
<[log in to unmask]>,Norbert Klein <[log in to unmask]>, Milton Mueller
<[log in to unmask]>
References: <[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask]>

At 13:03 28/11/2006, Carlos Afonso wrote:
>Dear Jefsey,
>If it is truly the case that INTLNET is not formalized as a non-profit
>organization, you could join ALAC (the at-large Internet users
>constituency), which, by the way, receives orders of magnitude more
>support from ICANN than NCUC and is higher up in ICANN's grand scheme of
>things. If your activity is linked to business, there are business
>constituencies within the ICANN system you could join as well.
>fraternal regards

Dear Carlos,
INTLNET is most probably the oldest datacoms non-profit organisation
(1978). We feel really hurt and shocked by all this. We came in bona
fide to get our right, were attacked by a nastygram from a person I
know quite well (whose I presume the personal motivations) which
piled silliness over ridiculous inexactitude. As he did not copy me,
I politely and kindly sent more information and then a documented
answer when I got a copy from Milton. I received no response from the
ExecCom, no question.

I asked Milton a committed response, I did not get it.
I asked you a committed response from you, I do not get it yet either.

INTLNET is formalised as a French non profit organisation under the
law of July 1st, 1901, registered on August 22, 1983 under the name
of Secretariat International pour les Applications de la
Téléinformatique, and using the name INTLNET since July 7th, 1983.
This has been adopted in its revised statutes by its GA of  August
13, 1983. I also indicated that INTLNET is so much not linked to
business that it has no banking account in use.

Now, if  you and the Execom decide that:

- I am a pathological liar (yet a magician for achieving alone the
INTLNET's records!),
- the US law applies to French organisations ("Organizations
incorporated as a non-commercial entity (in countries that have such
a provision in their commercial code)")
- I run a commercial activity under a non-profit cover (what leads to
the immediate dissolution of the association and possibly sends me to
jail), so INTLNET is _not_ "engaged in activities that are primarily
non-commercial, including, e.g., political advocacy, educational,
religious, charitable, scientific and artistic."

you will understand I need a formal decision, so I can lodge an
appeal and call on the ICANN Ombudsman.

Now I understand (and share your concerns) what you say about the
NCUC, but we cannot change ICANN and its Bylaws - ALAC is to
represent the interests of the individual users through organisations
such as the ISOC national Chapters which are open to everyone. Our
free (on expense external budget) relational space governances
advocacy, lobbying intelligence, operational information, technical
and applied research and development, secretariat services, strategic
think-tank, standardisation assistance orientation unfortunately does
not permit us that kind of openness. We need selected, proven,
seasoned people. However, from your remark, I will certainly propose
ISOC-France to complete its discussed adhesion to ALAC, be the
creation of an ISOC-PARIS local Chapter which would join the NCUC and
help getting additional interest from ICANN (since local relational
spaces gain importance in the WSIS).

For the time being, we are just trying to help ICANN in the IDN area
the same as we do for the other concerned parties. For that I need
INTLNET to be at the IDN TF,and therefore to be registered in its own
constituency, as it is its right.

Friendly yours,
jfc

>Jefsey_Morfin wrote:
> > Dear Chair, and ExeCom Members,
> > I received a mail from Milton today, stating that: "NCUC has followed
> > its charter to the letter. Your application was submitted to the
> > Executive Committee and it was their judgement that INTLNET is an
> > individual not an organization, and if an organization, not clearly a
> > noncommercial one consistent with the criteria in the charter. This does
> > not imply any lack of respect for your work but simply the boundaries
> > that the process needs to draw around constituency groups. If you want
> > to send out letters protesting this decision is it your right."
> >
> > I thank you to confirm if it reflects your position. If yes, I thank you
> > to be kind enough to explain its meaning to me, as I cannot make any
> > real sense out of its second sentence.
> > Best regards.
> > jfc
> >
> >