Re: [ga] IPC on ALAC

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Vittorio Bertola wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 22:59:33 -0700, you wrote:

> >Your comparision is completely off base.  Most of the IPC members are
> >not individual members, but rather are organizational members which
> >collectively represents tens of thousands of members.
> 
> While I understand this objection, I also note that many of the people
> who participate in icannatlarge.com, in the ALOC or in the other At
> Large efforts are acting on behalf of organizations who collectively
> represent thousands of members.

I have a concern that the assertion of representation is frequently
nothing but a bald assertion.  For example, I have several interests in
intellectual property - I have various patent, trademark, and copyright
rights.  And I am a member of the California State Bar section on
Intellectual Property (I'm speaking at its annual meeting next month).  
But I have not given my assent to be represented by those on the IPC.

In fact how do we know that those people on the IPC are actually who they
say they are and that they are properly accredited by the bodies they
claim to represent?  Requirements for identification and authentication
have been imposed on at-large and used as reasons to disembowel the
at-large.  Why are such requirements not imposed equally on other bodies 
within ICANN?

		--karl--



--
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