Re: [ga] MOTION: Request for a GA resolution on an IDN holders'constituency (IC)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Bill and all,

William S. Lovell wrote:

> All three of Eric Dierker, Leah, and Joop are making a lot of sense here.
> The distinction Eric makes between individuals who own domain names
> and those who do not is meaningful and significant.

  I would have to agree and as you know Bill this questionable distinction
has been discussed and debated a number of times as it relates to
stakeholders.

>  The constituencies
> for the two groups are at hand: Leah is right in saying that the at-large
> is the place for those who don't own domain names, and that answers
> the question I raised a few days ago about why have both an IDNO
> and an at-large.  The IDNO as promulgated by Joop is the place --
> duh! -- for "individual domain name owners," and I believe that it
> should be established as a constituency -- at long last.

  Also agree here as well.

>
>
> I regard myself as an individual -- duh! -- who has an interest in the
> broad issues of the internet, and would feel at home with others who
> are concerned with the spectre of domain name collisions and all
> that -- such events will affect people whether or not they own a
> domain name.  I also have an interest in such things as UDRP and
> WIPO, etc., as a domain name owner.

  Future domain name holders (Stakeholders all the same) may also have
interests in the UDRP and WIPO as well.  In addition many domain names
are not owned/held by a single individual but jointly held.  As such, their
interests are just as important to them and should be to the stakeholders
at large equally.

>  That is a narrower interest
> in the sense that it could affect the specific issue of my ownership
> and protection of particular domain names -- issues that would have
> no direct bearing on my use of the internet and trying to find some
> domain I heard about and all that.
>
> Nothing in the above should be taken to imply that any individual
> could not participate within both constituencies; no laws against
> that, so far as I know. Corporations would not qualify.

  What about individuals that are incorporated?  Do they also not
qualify?

>
>
> (Which raises a question: I've had the domain cerebalaw.com for
> quite a few years now, in support of my law practice as an individual.
> I'm about to enter into a Limited Liability Corporation with two other
> patent attorneys, for which we have registered the domain name
> aljpatents.com, and a lot of the stuff from the former is likely to show
> up in the latter. Does that throw me into the "corporate" category? I
> don't think so.)

  Agreed.  I don't think so either.

>
>
> Good piece of work by all three parties.
>
> Bill Lovell
>
> L Gallegos wrote:
>
> > Eric:
> >
> > IMO, the at-large is the place for non-domain name holders.  The DNSO
> > is the domain name supporting organization and it makes sense that
> > there should be an individual domain name holders constituency, if
> > there are to be constituencies at all.
> >
> > Leah
> >
> > On 7 May 2001, at 7:13, Eric Dierker wrote:
> >
> > > Now I see the reason this is a non-starter.
> > >
> > > Domain Name Holder(s) and Individual(s) are two distinct groups.  I do not
> > > own a Domain Name Hence I am an individual.  Joop owns a domain name hence,
> > > while of course he is an individual, he is a Domain Name Holder.
> > > Corporations can be Domain Name Holders but not individuals, Registrars and
> > > Registries can be holders but not individuals.  Individuals without domain
> > > names, and by shear numbers this is the vast majority of
> > > internetstakeholders, cannot and presumably do not want to be domain name
> > > holders.
> > >
> > > Believe it or not most of us net consumers want our ISPs to handle that
> > > kind of thing.  When you sign up for cable service here in California - the
> > > home of ICANN - you can get anything you want including website hosting
> > > without registering a domain name, you really just check a bunch of boxes
> > > and it is done. (and it costs about the same as premium TV service)
> > >
> > > Just like many of us with our cars, we just take them to the mechanic.
> > > Don't think for a second that that means we don't vote for and participate
> > > in law making and policy regarding our precious cars, but we leave
> > > mechanics to the mechanics.
> > >
> > > You see in my suspension I was cited for not contributing to the technical
> > > aspects of the discussion.  There is no club within ICANN I can join as an
> > > Individual who does not contribute to the technical issues.  Do not places
> > > me with you guys who just want to protect your domain names.
> > >
> > > Please review the discussions on Bill of Rights.  It is as though most just
> > > assume that the BoRs does not apply to individuals without domain names
> > > (just like woman and slaves in the U.S. prior to later sufferage)
> > >
> > > DO NOT PLACE REAL INDIVIDUALS WITHIN THE GROUP FOR DOMAIN NAME HOLDERS
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > Joop Teernstra wrote:
> > >
> > > > Since the Chair has now opened the floor for motions I would like to
> > > > start off with this one:
> > > >
> > > > Motion for the Recognition of an Individuals' Constituency (IC)
> > > >
> > > > Considering the majority vote  expressed by the physically assembled GA
> > > > in Santiago and Yokohama,
> > > >
> > > > considering the support expressed by the Association of Computing
> > > > Machinery (ACM) since Berlin 1999 and by the non commercial constituency
> > > > of the DNSO for an Individuals' constituency, since Santiago 2000,
> > > >
> > > > considering the Voting of the members of the DNSO-review working group
> > > > on this subject,
> > > >
> > > > considering the petition made by the first Steering Committee of  the
> > > > IDNO which reads as follows August 11, 1999 To the members of the Board
> > > > of Directors of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
> > > > (ICANN) 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 USA. L.S.,
> > > > This letter constitutes a reiteration of our public petition of 23 April,
> > > > 1999 under Article VI-B, Section 3(d) of the ICANN bylaws for recognition
> > > > of the Individual Domain Name Owner’s constituency (the IDNO) as a
> > > > Constituency of ICANN’s Domain Name Supporting Organization (the DNSO.)
> > > >
> > > > The IDNO was formed in April 1999. It is a self-organized, primarily
> > > > member funded, highly international constituency, springing from no
> > > > pre-existing organizations or structures. Yet its membership is already
> > > > larger than of any of the existing DNSO Constituencies. And we expect
> > > > that the IDNO's membership will grow rapidly once the IDNO is a
> > > > recognized constituency.
> > > >
> > > > IDNO members are active participants in ICANN, having attended several of
> > > > ICANN’s meetings.
> > > >
> > > > Our members come from many parts of the world.
> > > >
> > > > IDNO members are active participants in the DNSO’s General Assembly and
> > > > in the DNSO’s various working groups.
> > > >
> > > > The IDNO maintains a site on the World Wide Web at http://www.idno.org/
> > > > containing a members’ list, charter, archive of on-line discussions,
> > > > voting system, and other materials and resources.
> > > >
> > > > The IDNO has a public, archived e-mail discussion list.
> > > >
> > > > The IDNO is the only constituency with a fully operational electronic
> > > > voting system that has been repeatedly and successfully used to guide the
> > > > IDNO as it evolves.
> > > >
> > > > The purpose the IDNO is to give a voice to those individuals who “own”
> > > > domain names. The IDNO’s focus is on individuals, not on corporations or
> > > > organizations. The IDNO does not care whether a member is a
> > > > businessperson, a teacher, an artist, or a person using the Internet to
> > > > express his or her opinions.
> > > >
> > > > Because essentially all of the existing DNSO constituencies are open only
> > > > to corporations and organizations, these individuals have no way but the
> > > > IDNO to fully participate within the DNSO.
> > > >
> > > > We must mention that membership in the DNSO General Assembly, although
> > > > nominally open to individuals, is no substitute for having a Constituency
> > > > to defend Individuals' domain name interests. It is only through the IDNO
> > > > as a recognized Constituency that individual domain name owners can
> > > > participate with a full and peer voice on the DNSO’s names council.
> > > >
> > > > Why should the Individuals be represented in the DNSO?
> > > > ·       Registrations of domain names by individuals represent a large
> > > > number of all domain name registrations. A study conducted by Network
> > > > Solutions estimates that within the United States alone, 10% of the
> > > > domain names registered in the .com, .net, and .org domains are
> > > > registered to individuals. Further, there is evidence to indicate that
> > > > the percentage may be increasing. This leads to an estimated 300,000
> > > > individual domain names owners in .com, .net, and .org within the United
> > > > States alone. The number worldwide, especially when in all top level
> > > > domains are considered, could be substantially higher. ·       Every one
> > > > of these hundreds of thousands of people have a significant and well
> > > > defined interest in the operation and development of the domain name
> > > > system and the Internet. Yet none of these hundreds of thousands of
> > > > people are eligible to be admitted to any of the other constituencies. ·
> > > >      Domains owned by individuals are often used for both commercial and
> > > > non-commercial purposes. Individuals can not be adequately represented in
> > > > either "business" or "non-commercial" constituencies. It is our feeling
> > > > that as the net grows it will become quite common for personal hobbies to
> > > > evolve into significant business entities. ·       The IDNO is the only
> > > > constituency that would provide a voice for these people. ·
> > > > Interests and concerns of Individual Domain name Owners typically do not
> > > > coincide with the Interests and concerns of the other constituencies
> > > > represented in the DNSO. Indeed, in many cases their interests are in
> > > > conflict. Thus it is necessary for there to be a constituency with a
> > > > clear focus on the needs of individual domain name owners. ·
> > > > Without a clear and fully empowered place for individual domain name
> > > > owners, the DNSO will be a weak and limited body, speaking for only part
> > > > of the Internet community. The IDNO has adopted an inclusive approach to
> > > > its membership. Unlike other Constituencies which require that a
> > > > candidate for membership be a corporation or an organization, or be
> > > > engaged in a particular type of business, the IDNO simply looks at
> > > > whether a candidate “owns” a domain name. The IDNO measures ownership not
> > > > by legal formalisms, but rather by a pragmatic evaluation whether the
> > > > candidate has sufficient elements of control over a domain name that it
> > > > amounts to what reasonable people would consider to be ownership. Our
> > > > membership rules permit membership even when the domain name owner owns
> > > > the name through a intermediary, such as a corporation or trust, that is
> > > > fully under the control of the candidate. The IDNO has evolved beyond a
> > > > gathering of people. The IDNO has both an elected Steering Committee and
> > > > a Membership Committee. The IDNO is an early, and perhaps the first
> > > > successful experiment in broadly based democratic participation within
> > > > ICANN. The IDNO brings to ICANN the concerns of the individual domain
> > > > name owner, concerns that have so far lacked an advocate.
> > > >
> > > > (appendices omitted: for the complete petition and its signatories, see
> > > > www.idno.org/petition.htm)
> > > >
> > > > considering that the ICANN  Board has until now refrained from responding
> > > > in public to this petition and from publishing it on its website for
> > > > public comment,
> > > >
> > > > considering the Bylaws art. VI, section 3 (d) that reads:
> > > >
> > > > (d) Any group of individuals or entities may petition the Board for
> > > > recognition
> > > > as a new or separate Constituency. Any such petition will be posted for
> > > > public comment pursuant to Article III, Section 3. The Board may create
> > > > new Constituencies in response to such a petition, or on its own motion,
> > > > if it determines that such action would serve the purposes of the
> > > > Corporation.
> > > >
> > > > I move that the GA will express its support for the immediate
> > > > acknowledgement of an Individuals' Constituency by the Board in
> > > > accordance with its Bylaws.
> > > >
> > > > I move that this support will take the form of a GA Resolution
> > > > recommending that the Board will  place either the creation of such an IC
> > > > or the "approval in principle" on its Agenda for a decision in Stockholm.
> > > >
> > > > Respectfully yours,
> > > >
> > > > --Joop Teernstra LL.M.--
> > > > the Cyberspace Association and
> > > > the constituency for Individual Domain Name Owners
> > > > Elected representative.
> > > > http://www.idno.org
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > > > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
> > > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html