ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga] At-Large membership: definition

  • To: vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: [ga] At-Large membership: definition
  • From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:39:58 -0800 (PST)
  • Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=6lw6GTe2zZGtJjW4NWe2L2GgPR2XuB8a97g5iJvVpQd8FTj4o2OBscPOCV6gkqMBdGR2Yde1i9WCyc1SSAdLoDU9L3F3ho3lj7Y+nPWkAuFzonYSacNL9yXF7g0OKwjXLMb0KN0tBoFZ6IesGwKLWYZXfrxt3vVHJMJKHZs2Tr8= ;
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Vittorio,

I refer you to the Membership Advisory Committee
Commentary on the Principles of the At-large
Membership:

1. At-large membership should primarily represent
those individuals and organizations that are not
represented by the Supporting Organizations (SOs).  
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rcs/macberlin.html

In view of this definition (arrived at by consensus
through the ICANN process), can you explain to me on
what basis the ALAC certified the Intellectual
Property & Technology (IPT) Section of the Hawaii
State Bar Association as an at-large structure?

Intellectual property lawyers are already represented
within the GNSO.  They have a constituency called the
Intellectual Property Constituency.  Why didn't you
refer these applicants to their proper home within
ICANN instead of bastardizing the concept of At-Large
membership even further?

Are all of you on the ALAC totally clueless?  




	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. 
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>