Hi Bill, I agree that we should submit a response to this that discusses in detail the great wisdom of their SG proposal. However, I'd prefer that we not try to throw something together in 2 hours, but rather take some time and come up with a solid document. A response from the non-commercial users to the IPC's charge against us must be received by ICANN - even if it comes in 1 week after the public comment period. Best, Robin On Apr 15, 2009, at 2:16 PM, William Drake wrote: > Robin, > > Nice that they waited until the last minute to submit this, without > ever seeking a discussion with us in any setting. > > What's the precise cut off time for comments? It's what, 2pm in > California, so there is some time before COB. If you have a little > head space, why not write a short critique of the CSG Charter, such > that it is? It's after 11pm here and I can't type any more today, > but I'd support whatever you come up with. There's plenty to > complain about starting with the first para, which claims the CSC > represents "users;" the restrictive membership construction (e.g. > how many individual entrepreneurs do they have, how representative, > diverse, and "deserving" are they); and complete lack of clarity > and development in their draft about essentially all institutional > aspects (all those high-paid lawyers and this is the best they can > do?), a point that should be hammered. Perhaps a new council > shouldn't be seated until they clarify how they will select six > reflecting the criteria we are alleged not to meet. > > Just a thought. > > Bill > > > > > On Apr 15, 2009, at 10:45 PM, Robin Gross wrote: > >> The IP Constituency submitted its comments today on the >> stakeholder group petitions. >> >> See: >> http://forum.icann.org/lists/sg-petitions-charters/ >> pdfyb62GoZM3w.pdf >> >> It calls on the ICANN Board to deny the Non-Commercial Stakeholder >> Group its rightful 6 council seats, claiming we aren't >> "representative" enough. The IPC complains because our counselors >> will remain seated after June (but doesn't mention that its own >> counselors will also remain seated). In fact, it didn't make any >> comments on its own proposals - it is only a slam on all non- >> commercial users proposals. >> >> Wow. They really are desperate with this move. >> >> Robin >> >> >> >> >> IP JUSTICE >> Robin Gross, Executive Director >> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA >> p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 >> w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask] >> >> >> > > *********************************************************** > William J. Drake > Senior Associate > Centre for International Governance > Graduate Institute of International and > Development Studies > Geneva, Switzerland > [log in to unmask] > New book: Governing Global Electronic Networks, > http://tinyurl.com/5mh9jj > *********************************************************** > IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]