[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ga] Re: Universities non-commercial
Mark and all,
Thank you Mark for partly making my point in other terms and using
an example here.
It is important therefore that the ICANN (Initial?) Interim Board
and the DNSO GA exercise significant oversight in this matter as it
impacts conflict of interest issues as well as potentially side stepping
a potential "Stacking of the Deck" with respect to seating a accurately
representative NC as well...
I hope that this clears up the FACT that .EDU's are not automatically
by any stretch of the imagination, noncommercial. And as such,
do not belong in the Noncom constituency. The same can be said
for several of the ccTLD registries as well, .UK, .NU, .TO, .US and
.TJ come to mind for instance.... More on this later in response to
Pisanty's reply to Martin Muler's post to this list...
Mark Perkins wrote:
> Jeff
> Overall this may be true, but many behave commercially nowadays, perhaps
> this is why it seems more than 60% :(
>
> More seriously, many subsections (Centres, Institutes, etc )of universities
> have a very clear commercial remit - and this is besides so called "Science
> Parks" which are clearly commercial even though they may have majority
> University holdings...
>
> Mark Perkins
> Librarian (acting)
> Secretariat of the Pacific Community Library
> BP D5, 98848 Noumea Cedex
> New Caledonia, South Pacific
> Tel: 00 687 262000 Fax: 00 687 263818
> email: markp@spc.org.nc / web: http://www.spc.org.nc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com]
> Sent: 28 July 1999 01:45
> To: Non-Commercial Domain Name Holders Constituency Discussion List
> Subject: Re: Universities non-commercial
>
> Pisanty, Mark and all,
>
> Dismissing the obvious FUD "Flame Bait" that Pisanty has stated in this
> post and is now quite famous for in the past on many other Mailing lists
> similar to this one, it would be relevant to consider that more than 60%
> of all known universities world wide are NOT non-commercial in nature,
> irrespective of the fact that they may charge for copies of certain types
> of documentation...
>
> Pisanty Baruch Alejandro-FQ wrote:
>
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > this cannot be a blanket statement concerning academic institutions. It
> > has to be approached by way of fact-gathering (not JW FUD clouds of
> > smoke).
> >
> > Public universities around the world are non-commercial. So are most
> > private universities in many countries, other than for-profit
> > institutiones.
> >
> > Some but not all academic institutions which are not universities have to
> > be studied in more detail.
> >
> > The patents etc. issue is pretty clear, especially in the case of public
> > universities and in private universities which operate R&D with
> > contributions of public monies through grants. The intellectual property
> > generated with public resources does not in general flow into the
> > generation of profit at no cost. Undoubtedly there are a variety of
> > situations which should be analyzed case by case.
> >
> > I do not know (unfortunately) the institution you work at, Pacific
> > Community Library in New Caledonia, but I'd venture the guess that you are
> > a non-commercial, non-profit institution and still charge for copies and
> > other services!
> >
> > Alejandro Pisanty
> >
> > On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Mark Perkins wrote:
> >
> > > Milton
> > > As has been discussed here I would very careful about assuming academic
> > > institutions are non commercial. This becomes clear when one looks at
> issues
> > > such as biopiracy and patent registrations / licensing :(
> > >
> > > Mark Perkins
> > > Librarian (acting)
> > > Secretariat of the Pacific Community Library
> > > BP D5, 98848 Noumea Cedex
> > > New Caledonia, South Pacific
> > > Tel: 00 687 262000 Fax: 00 687 263818
> > > email: markp@spc.org.nc / web: http://www.spc.org.nc
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu]
> > > Sent: 28 July 1999 02:05
> > > To: Non-Commercial Domain Name Holders Constituency Discussion List
> > > Subject: Re: Coments about proposal of modifications/additions to origin
> > > al drafts
> > >
> > >
> > > This is a good compromise. It is true in Asia and Africa, too: the
> ccTLDs
> > > often
> > > are operated by academic institutions, joint university cooperatives, or
> > > non-profit foundations who might be eligible to join NCDNHC, but are
> also
> > > part of
> > > the ccTLD constituency.
> > >
> > > Let these non-commercial entities be eligible for observer status with
> full
> > > discussion rights in our lists. That would be a suitable solution. It
> would
> > > also
> > > allow us to include people who might be excluded by the
> "one-constituency"
> > > policy,
> > > while still preventing domination of our discussions by entities who are
> not
> > > eligible.
> > >
> > > Raul Echeberria wrote:
> > >
> > > > >But organizations that are part of another constituency and want to
> > > > "observe"
> > > > >in the NCDNHC? I see problems with this -- mostly from the
> perspective
> > > that
> > > > >a participant from another constituency could be very influential in
> > > shaping
> > > > >an issue that we are discussing and trying to form a decision on.
> Coming
> > > in
> > > > >from outside, with another constituency's points and persuasive
> > > information,
> > > > >might really sway our own discussions.
> > > > >
> > > > >Let me ask: Are other constituencies allowing observers? How
> involved
> > > are
> > > > >the "observers" allowed to be in the constituency's discussion? Is
> there
> > > a
> > > > >way to distinguish comments of the constituency members from those of
> the
> > > > >observers?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think that is a good idea allowing observers, BUT ONLY if they are
> non
> > > > profit or non commercial organizations and fulfil the conditions to
> apply
> > > > to the NCDNHC.
> > > >
> > > > In Latinamerica, the most of ccTLDs and national NICs are Academic
> > > Networks
> > > > or Universities. May be is the same in Asia, Africa and Europe.
> > > > They have to choose wich constituency they participate in, but they
> fulfil
> > > > the condition to join NCDNHC. Then, is illegal they influence our
> > > > discussion ?.
> > > > I think that the answer is No.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Raul Echeberria -
> > > > raul@inia.org.uy
> > > >
> > > > Instituto Nacional de Investigacion Agropecuaria.
> > > > Andes 1365 Piso 12
> > > > Montevideo - URUGUAY
> > > > Tel. 598 2 9020550
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: mueller@IST.SYR.EDU
> > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > > leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1799I@lyris.isoc.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > m i l t o n m u e l l e r // m u e l l e r @ s y r . e d u
> > > syracuse university http://istweb.syr.edu/~mueller/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: markp@spc.org.nc
> > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > > leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1799I@lyris.isoc.org
> > >
> > > ---
> > > You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as:
> APisan@SERVIDOR.UNAM.MX
> > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1799I@lyris.isoc.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: Jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ncdnhc-discuss-1799I@lyris.isoc.org
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k 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: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208