Tamir,

Thank you for your contribution to this discussion. Much of this is 
dealt with in the Pathfinder Webinar series, but of course with only 20 
minutes or so in this particular session, the intent is to open up 
ongoing discussions on this issues, beyond ICANN and in those venues 
that are important to Civil Society Organizations. I have reproduced 
(below: bottom) the last few words from your postings (since it is 
available to all in its original form) and this comment is targeted to 
the good point you raise there.

Your comment underlines why there is need for dialogue here. A civil 
society organization may have "consumers" if it is selling them 
tee-shorts and coffee mugs, but that is a misleading term here. There 
are several properties of civil society organizations that have to be 
taken into account when talking about even something as specific as 
"brand protection". One has to move beyond a business/customer perspective.

The first property that must be taken into account is that a civil 
society organization has a social mission and vision and not a fiduciary 
duty to maximize shareholder (organizational value) so its "brand" 
(intellectual property/reputation) is not an economic commodity. The 
second property is that what civil society organizations do, some of 
which is service, some of which is advocacy, or both, has different 
constituencies to which they are accountable when compared to commercial 
interests. Civil society organizations can be member drive, member 
supported, and mission/vision driven while seeking funding in various ways.

There are a number of ways for a civil society's "brand" (read: image & 
reputation) to be damaged with regard to operational aspects of the DNS 
system, and in ways that are beyond ICANN's remit. It is the NPOC 
position that those are important concerns for not-for-profit and civil 
society organizations, there are insufficient levels of awareness and 
engagement there, and that it is within NPOC's remit to work on raising 
awareness and engagement both with regard to operational issues within 
ICANN and operational issues beyond ICANN.

It is important to remember that for member driven and member supported 
organizations (differences in governance there) any operational factor 
that impacts on the brand, impacts on those members, impacts on the 
deliverables within the mission and vision of the organization, and 
impacts on the relationship between the organization, its members, its 
intended beneficiaries and those partners it works with. There are areas 
of government policy, and the evolution of the Internet ecosystem, 
coming down the road that have potential challenging impacts on Civil 
Society organizations and these are in the "issues pot" being stirred by 
NPOC's own efforts (e.g., submission to the EU/EC) and collaborative 
efforts (e.g., Pathfinder webinars).

It is obviously important to keep clear whether one is advocating on 
one's organizational behalf, on behalf of the target areas of its 
mission and vision, or on behalf of its members.Different governments 
deal with civil society organizations differently in these areas 
(sometimes contrary to their own commitments under the UDHR). The 
integrity and "brand protections" issues playing field is much wider for 
Civil Society organizations than it is for someone selling sugar water, 
or tooth paste, even when commercial organizations brand themselves with 
the socially responsible corporations (SRC) logo.

Keep tuned as this issues play out.

Sam L.

On 2015-02-04 11:17 AM, Tamir Israel wrote:
>   Regardless, though, if it's about
> teaching civil society orgs how to protect their own IP (and why they
> should) I would think that falls in bucket B (self-interest not public
> interest).
>
> Best regards,
> Tamir