Re: [ga] NC BS

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 02:57 p.m. 17/05/2002 +0200, Philip Sheppard wrote:
>Joop, thank you for your comments. Are you saying that the majority of 
>individuals currently wishing to be engaged in ICANN and outside of the 
>constituency structure are not consumers but:
>
>"producers of content, directly related to their Domain" ...with a 
>subsequent "highly personal interest in a NAME, an identifier of 
>themselves or their on-line business".
>

Yes, this is my experience with the people who have seriously participated.
It will be easy to find out with a poll.


>In other words such individuals are typically unincorporated businesses 
>(profit or not for profit), sharing a lot of common interest with the 
>business constituency or non-comms, but are today unable to join the BC or 
>non-coms because they choose to trade as individuals rather than be 
>incorporated as SMEs or organisations ?
>

Philip, it is rather tiring to keep repeating the same arguments over 4 
years without being heard by you.
Neither the current "business constituency" nor the "non-coms" are 
representative  of typical Individuals' interests and opening them up to 
individuals is unlikely to change that:
one is captured by big corporates and the NCDNHC is terminally sabotaged.

Opening them up for a few token individuals would do nothing to solve the 
fundamental representational deficit.

For the same reason opening the IP constituency to individuals (as an 
individual Trade Mark owner  I should certainly have access to this 
"constituency") is not going to change anything there either.

The fact is that Individual Domain Name Holders can  have an interest in 
all three constituencies.

What individuals (and the DNSO!)  need is a one-person-one-vote 
Constituency of their own, as a recognized member of the DNSO and with 
voting representatives on the Names Council.
Sure, there could be SME representation in the BC,  but it is doubtful if 
it would  ever get any influence on BC policy.

>If yes this perspective, and therefore the way we incorporate these 
>stakeholders, is important. What helps is to differentiate the interests 
>of individuals as providers from individuals as users.
>

What helps is to focus on the Individuals as stakeholder- *owners*.  The 
"user" part is something that consumer protection organizations can deal with.


--Joop

--
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