On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:34 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Ditto. NCSG is a non-profit non-commercial constituency -- the proposal does
> not make any sense.
>
> frt rgds
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 02/11/2011 11:53 PM, Robin Gross wrote:
>>
>> I strongly object to Debbie and Amber's request that NCSG open up its
>> membership to commercial trade associations.
>>
>> NCSG is the *only* place at ICANN that is supposed to be free from
>> commercial influence so other important goals can be pursued. All of the
>> other 5 constituencies in the GNSO are commercial in nature. And many in
>> At-Large are commercially oriented, as "noncommercial" is not part of its
>> mission. But NCSG is the only place that is reserved specifically for
>> non-commercial interests and it is important to keep this space free from
>> commercial concerns, which permeate in every other nook and cranny of ICANN.
>> ICANN's model was designed to allow a specific space for only
>> noncommercial interests to be promoted as a way of advancing the health and
>> development of the Internet. Human rights can never depend upon commercial
>> interests alone to succeed, as one example of "other" goals besides
>> commercial ones ICANN might want to consider. Without a barrier of some
>> kind between the two worlds, noncommercial interests will be over-run by the
>> well-financed commercial interests at ICANN
>
> . Of course commercial interests have a place in policy development, but
> ICANN must leave a single solitary space that cannot be over-run by
> commercial interests if it wants to claim it represents "the global public
> interest".
>>
>> If we opened up NCSG to commercial trade organizations, groups like the
>> Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) or the International
>> Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) would join. I bet Big Pharma
>> trade associations would be among the first to sign-up to NCSG (since their
>> interests are so woefully under-represented at ICANN between the IPC and the
>> BC).
>>
>> No, I think we have to draw a line at some point -- and it is with
>> commercial trade associations. They don't belong in NCSG. They have a
>> legitimate place in policy development, but it isn't going to be in the
>> non-commercials' name.
>>
>> Best,
>> Robin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 11, 2011, at 3:02 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the edit pass.
>>>
>>> On 'civility' I expect we can come to any agreement. As you said, it has
>>> such a broad meaning.
>>>
>>> I took a quick look at the other comments, and some of your recommended
>>> changes seem like they would be substantive changes to the charter that was
>>> approved by a vote in the NCSG. I have been very careful to not make
>>> substantive changes during this process. I will read it more carefully this
>>> weekend. I would think that I would need to have consensus in the EC for
>>> making any substantive changes on behalf of the NCSG. I would like to see
>>> where the discussion goes on your proposals.
>>>
>>> But of course I will forward them to the SIC and Staff, with any comments
>>> that are generated on these lists. And I would expect you to offer them as
>>> a comments during the comment period.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> a.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11 Feb 2011, at 14:31, Amber Sterling wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Debbie and I reviewed the proposed NCSG charter together and our
>>>> edits/comments are attached. Please let me know if you have any
>>>> questions.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Amber
>>>>
>>>> Amber Sterling
>>>> Senior Intellectual Property Specialist
>>>> Association of American Medical Colleges
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:
[log in to unmask]]
>>>> Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 3:44 PM
>>>> To: NCSG EC; NCSG Policy Committee
>>>> Subject: [ncsg-ec] my review of the staff's edit to our SG charter.
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Here is a summary of my comments. I intend to send this to Sam Monday
>>>> morning.
>>>>
>>>> In some cases these comments may not make sense without Sam's comment in
>>>> the text. I guess sometimes they might not makes sense in any case.
>>>>
>>>> These comments can also be found in the document itself.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Comments:
>>>>
>>>> Re 1.2.2 (c) Inclusion of civility
>>>>
>>>> If necessary I am sure we will include the word 'civility'. Many of the
>>>> NCSG members, especially those in NCUC, see this particular requirement
>>>> for civility as being problematic in that it requires a value judgment
>>>> close to political correctness in order to make a judgment of what is
>>>> civil and what is not. Especially in a multi-cultural organization
>>>> often one cultures directness is another cultures incivility. We also
>>>> believe that this criteria has been used improperly by the Ombudsman and
>>>> others in ICANN's past to limit freedom of expression.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Re 2.2.3 - definition of large and small organization
>>>>
>>>> Personally I prefer the original NCSG definition and recommend that the
>>>> Constituency process includes this instead. the problem with the
>>>> criterion here is that certain organization will be excluded from
>>>> membership based on not being large enough to be small.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> a. Organizations that have more than 50 employees, or are membership
>>>> organizations with more than 500 individual members, shall be classified
>>>> as "large organizations".
>>>>
>>>> b. Organizations that are composed of 10 or more organizational members
>>>> that qualify as "large" under criterion (a.) above shall be classified
>>>> as "large organizations".
>>>>
>>>> c. Organizations that do not qualify as large organizations shall be
>>>> classified as "small organizations".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2.2.8 Inactive Membership
>>>>
>>>> While it is reasonable to include a sentence to indicate that members
>>>> can resign, i don't think we need to have names on the inactive list
>>>> times out.
>>>>
>>>> Also, at this point we do not have dues. We are considering the
>>>> introduction of voluntary contributions i the future, but at this point
>>>> membership in the NCSG is like membership in ISOC, no payment necessary.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2.2.10 Sam had a question on outreach and coordination between
>>>> constituency Outreach and SG outreach. recommended adding:
>>>>
>>>> Membership outreach will be coordinated with Constituency outreach
>>>> efforts and any outreach efforts established by the GNSO or ICANN.
>>>>
>>>> 2.4.2.1 Requirements for appeal and the question of whether there should
>>>> be weighted notion of bringing the case for consideration.
>>>>
>>>> We thought about this and decided that while the voting threshold
>>>> includes the proportionality, the raising of the issue did not need to.
>>>>
>>>> 2.4.3 Chair election - changed the line to read:
>>>>
>>>> A Chair can serve, at maximum, 2 full one year terms[SE1] consecutively.
>>>> There must be at least one intervening term before a member can be
>>>> elected again as chair;[AD2]
>>>>
>>>> [SE1]For consideration: Has there been discussion about when the terms
>>>> would begin/end? That could be specified in here, but not required.
>>>>
>>>> [AD2]not really. Basically that gets defined on an election by
>>>> election basis. I was criticized once for making the charter too long
>>>> by getting too much into detail. This sort of thing does not seem to
>>>> really need codification, especially since creating a generic rule can
>>>> get confusing. On the other hand, I think there was an ambiguity about
>>>> whether a chair could serve again in the future, so I added
>>>> clarification.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Anyone have something else to add?
>>>>
>>>> Assuming the constituency process is approved, I think the changes Sam
>>>> made were mostly ok. None of my comments is really big, except for
>>>> perhaps the one about big and small organizations that create an empty
>>>> spot for many of our small organization that are not big enough to be
>>>> small under the staff' definition.
>>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>>
>>>> a.
>>>>
>>>> <NCSG Charter-2011-02-11_Amber-Debbie.doc>
>>>> ----
>>>> Everything about this list:
http://info.n4c.eu/sympa/info/ncsg-ec
>>>
>>>
>>> ----
>>> Everything about this list:
http://info.n4c.eu/sympa/info/ncsg-policy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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]
>>
>>
>>
>