> > On the issue of the USOC, I would like to reiterate that the USOC may be > non-profit but it is certainly non-commercial. A typo? On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Konstantinos Komaitis < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > On the issue of the USOC, I would like to reiterate that the USOC may be > non-profit but it is certainly non-commercial. Here is a quote from a US > case: ‘On review of the statute and the history of its enactment, it is > apparent that *the primary purpose of these provisions is to secure to > the USOC the commercial and promotional rights* to all then-unencumbered > uses of "Olympic" and other specified words, marks, and symbols, see United > States Olympic Committee v. Intelicense Corp., S.A., 737 F.2d 263, 266, 222 > USPQ 766, 768 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 982 (1984), but subject > to the commercial rights that existed at the time of enactment’ (the > statute referring to the protection of the Olympic mark). This case, > clearly indicates that the USOC has commercial rights on the term Olympic > and, thus, have commercial interests deriving from the name.**** > > ** ** > > And here is another interesting article I came across, which in my eyes at > least makes USOC purely a commercial enterprise: > http://www.21mktg.com/docs/USOC_Sign_Citi-SportsBusiness_Journal.pdf**** > > ** ** > > KK**** > > ** ** > > Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,**** > > ** ** > > Senior Lecturer,**** > > Director of Postgraduate Instructional Courses**** > > Director of LLM Information Technology and Telecommunications Law**** > > University of Strathclyde,**** > > The Law School,**** > > Graham Hills building, **** > > 50 George Street, Glasgow G1 1BA **** > > UK**** > > tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306**** > > > http://www.routledgemedia.com/books/The-Current-State-of-Domain-Name-Regulation-isbn9780415477765 > **** > > Selected publications: > http://hq.ssrn.com/submissions/MyPapers.cfm?partid=501038**** > > Website: www.komaitis.org**** > > ** ** > > *From:* NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of > *Joy Liddicoat > *Sent:* Τετάρτη, 16 Νοεμβρίου 2011 2:29 πμ > > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [npoc-voice] Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Notes from > NCSG-EC Teleconference on 8 November 2011**** > > ** ** > > Thanks Alain … and in the interests of helping us do so (regain the tone > that is, and with thanks for the vigorousness, if not for the intemperance, > of the various posts by others) … I sensed we were getting close to some > shared areas of rough consensus (across the posts by Avri and subsequent > exchanges with Kelly and others) and I would favour keeping working towards > that. **** > > ** ** > > As an aside, I’ve witnessed similar styles of arguments to those on this > list (although on different topics) at the United Nations where there are > more than 13,000 registered civil society groups covering almost every > conceivable interest group or human rights topic (what’s the criteria for a > women’s human rights group, or a non-government group etc etc) Plus a few > inconceivable and yet unimagined (my own favourites being the UFO group – > which I guess is probably funded by aliens, but I am not sure of the > business model or the nature of their non-commercial interests …;) **** > > ** ** > > I have previously expressed my personal concerns about discriminatory > licensing policy of the IOC in relation to sporting events hosted by gay > organisations not being given permission to use the word “Olympic”. This is > an issue in other human rights forums, and I would not want any membership > criteria in this stakeholder group to perpetuate that, but that is a > different issue from commercial/non-commercial points previously raised. > **** > > Cheers**** > > Joy**** > > ** ** > > *From:* NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of > *Alain Berranger > *Sent:* Wednesday, 16 November 2011 11:48 a.m. > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: [npoc-voice] Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Notes from NCSG-EC > Teleconference on 8 November 2011**** > > ** ** > > Sir,**** > > ** ** > > Frankly your tone is unacceptable - at any time from anyone - but coming > from an U. of Syracuse senior academic, I'm not impressed! Annoyed or not > however, I have tried to keep my comments substantive and based on facts;* > *** > > ** ** > > On a substantive basis, two points as it seems the "facts" on which the > decision was made are wrong: i) the hundred of millions of network > television licensing revenues do not go to OCs but to the games' organizing > committee - or am I wrong here and need to be corrected - please do so if > that is the case and we will all learn about this? ii) When I visit the > USOC website, I have to dig deep to find a modest sponsorship reference to > Coca Cola... so where are all the corporate ads you are referring to? and > if they were more, where would the problem be?**** > > ** ** > > It seems clear to me, referring back to Avri's comments, and to Kelly's > email exchange with Avri, and scanning the USOC website, that the principal > activity of USOC is to support athletes and the cost of their > participation. That is the criteria for a non-commercial classification. On > the issue of brand protection, I'm unsure where the distinction lie between > commercial and non-commercial... I see brands (and logos) being protected > by all segments of society. **** > > ** ** > > I do not think corporate sponsorships/donations, whatever the size by the > way, make an entity commercial per se. If one used that criteria, your own > university (or mine) would be deemed commercial, just because it accepted > $30 million from JP Morgan Chase or, in the case of Schulich School of > Business (where I am an Executive-in-residence) receiving tens of millions > from the Schulich family. I do not think it is the case for neither > institutions.**** > > ** ** > > I do hope that the tone of exchange will return to normalcy.**** > > ** ** > > AB**** > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > **** > > Alain**** > > Nothing in this message alters the basic facts upon which the decision was > based, namely the hundreds of millions of dollars in network television > licensing deals and corporate advertisements on the USOC website, and the > extent to which USOC’s perspectives on brand protection are fundamentally > in alignment with those of the CSG. No one is going to change their minds. > If you want to keep harping on it, you can, but frankly you are just > annoying people. **** > > **** > > --MM**** > > **** > > *From:* NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of > *Alain Berranger > *Sent:* Monday, November 14, 2011 2:27 PM > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: [NCSG-Discuss] [npoc-voice] Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Notes from > NCSG-EC Teleconference on 8 November 2011**** > > **** > > 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 <[log in to unmask]> > 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 |** **Cell**: 719.330.0266 |** * > *Fax**: 719.866.4839 | [log in to unmask] | **www.teamusa.org***** > > **** > > *From:* [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On > Behalf Of *Alain Berranger > *Sent:* Saturday, November 12, 2011 3:09 PM > *To:* Avri Doria > *Cc:* [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask] > *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 <[log in to unmask]> 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 <[log in to unmask]> > 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 [log in to unmask] 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 f: +1-415-462-6451 > > w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > 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 > > NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, 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 > >**** > > > > **** > > **** > > -- > 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 > **** > > NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, 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**** > > **** > > > > **** > > **** > > -- > 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 > **** > > NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, 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**** > > **** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > -- > 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 > **** > > NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, 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**** > > ** ** > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -