Re: [ga] .com, and possible "material breach" of the contract

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris and all former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,

I got it from the IRS.  What was the name of you so called charity?  Perhaps
I should report it to the IRS for their review and investigation..

kidsearch wrote:

> Where do you get that 2/3 of the money they receive has to be in the form of
> donations? Some nonprofits are completely funded by the government. Some are
> fee-based services such as social service orgs that use a sliding scale
> based on income format. Others make marketing partnerships with for profit
> entities, etc. etc.
>
> I run a charity, Jeff, and the IRS has never stated any regulation similar
> to your 2/3 rule. How I spend the money that IS received is very regulated,
> but how I get the funds, as long as it is through legal means, has no
> regulation I am aware of. Only in the instance of UBI (Unrelated Business
> Income) is it covered at all. That means if I run a missing children
> organization, but also charge people for parking in my parking lot, the org
> has to pay taxes on the parking lot income, because it is "unrelated" to
> finding missing children.
>
> ICANN receiving fees related to domain names is not UBI, so they would not
> be taxed for it. Please point me to any website or any IRS code that
> mentions 2/3 of their money must come from donations.
>
> PS: What in my post makes you think I forgot about Registrants? Last time I
> checked, most registrants are users of the Internet. So if I include all
> users, that must inevitably include users who have registered a domain name.
> What I hoped for in my post was some advice from someone who actually HAS
> legal knowledge in the area of taxation and civil liability. Maybe you
> missed that part.
>
> Chris McElroy, President,
> Kidsearch Network
> http://www.KidsearchNetwork.org
> http://www.MissingChildrenBlog.com
> http://www.RunawayTeens.org
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "General Assembly of the DNSO" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Kathy Smith"
> <KSMITH@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; "icann board address" <icann-board@xxxxxxxxx>; "Paul
> Twomey" <twomey@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 12:03 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] .com, and possible "material breach" of the contract
>
> > You like Richard forgot about Registrants also largely not being
> represented.
> >
> > The answer to your first question is yes as ICANN is supposed to be
> > a non-profit Calaifornia Corp. As such, 2/3's of it's funding is required
> > to be from donations. As registration fees cannot be considered a
> > legitimate donation, ICANN could be challenged regarding such
> > fees/tax accordingly. As this is an old issue which was hotly debated
> > over 3 years ago now via Esther Dysons suggestion of this such a
> > fee, perhaps ICANN BoD and Staff members have thought
> > such had been long forgotten.
> >
> > kidsearch wrote:
> >
> > > Good point Richard. It is akin to a tx and therefore requires ICANN to
> have
> > > an active constituency that represents the users that will pay the tax.
> > >
> > > I believe it would hold up in court. That may be the action that has to
> be
> > > taken. Besides ICANN would cave to lawsuits. That is evident.
> > >
> > > Some of you with more legal experience please comment.
> > >
> > > 1. Can this annual price hike be related to a tax in the legal sense?
> > > 2. If so, does law require representation in ICANN or does our supposed
> > > representation in the US government suffice?
> > > 3. If yes to #2, how does that affect representation for non-us users?
> > > 4. If the answers to #1 and #2 were yes, would it hold up in a court of
> law?
> > > 5. Even if the answers were not clear on #1 and #2, would a lawsuit
> shine
> > > enough light on the subject and cause enough concern among the ICANN
> BoD,
> > > that it might be worth the effort?
> > >
> > > Chris McElroy, President,
> > > Kidsearch Network
> > > http://www.KidsearchNetwork.org
> > > http://www.MissingChildrenBlog.com
> > > http://www.RunawayTeens.org
> > > http://www.disastervictims.org
> > > http://thingsthatjustpissmeoff.blogspot.com
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: "General Assembly of the DNSO" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "George Kirikos"
> > > <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 9:40 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [ga] .com, and possible "material breach" of the contract
> > >
> > > > What concerns me (among other things) is that this 'taxation' is not
> > > > accompanied by representation on behalf of the people being taxed.
> > > >
> > > > It is abundantly clear that ICANN has excluded ordinary internet users
> > > from
> > > > meaningful representation in its processes. Even its supposed body for
> > > > individual internet users (ALAC) bans the membership of...
> individuals!
> > > >
> > > > Prior to that, ICANN's motives and intentions were transparent when it
> > > > expelled the elected representatives of the At Large movement from its
> > > Board
> > > > Room.
> > > >
> > > > Taxation without representation is more like the start of tyranny.
> Hence
> > > > Verisign's newly-acquired powers to raise costs to registrants on an
> > > annual
> > > > basis have been granted without reference to the people who will
> actually
> > > be
> > > > footing the bill.
> > > >
> > > > ICANN's craven surrender to vested interests, and its rejection of
> > > bottom-up
> > > > democracy, are profoundly disturbing.
> > > >
> > > > Yrs,
> > > >
> > > > Richard Henderson
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > > What's very disturbing to me... is that as ICANN is
> > > > > supposed to be a non-profit corporation it... has the right to
> > > > > collect fees (Basically a Tax) on registrants...
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
> >    Abraham Lincoln
> >
> > "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
> > very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
> >
> > "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> > liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> > P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> > United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> > ===============================================================
> > Updated 1/26/04
> > CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> > IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
> > ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >  Registered Email addr with the USPS
> > Contact Number: 214-244-4827
> >
> >
> >

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827