RE: [ga] RE: Registrants Constituency

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>]

Karl,

Just to clarify my point.
I am not arguing that there should not be a place in the GNSO for "normal"
users (i.e. non-registrants). I am only saying that if we have already
tremendous problems in building a presence for registrants, it might be a
useless waste of resources to try to get to the wider objective (for the
time being).
If you want to put it this way, it is not a matter of principle, it is a
matter of opportunity.

Regards,
Roberto
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Auerbach [mailto:karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: 05 March 2007 11:35
> To: Roberto Gaetano
> Cc: 'Danny Younger'; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ga] RE: Registrants Constituency
> 
> Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> 
> > On one hand, the voice of the registrants in the GNSO (and 
> I want to 
> > stress "registrants" vs. "users", simply because past 
> experience has 
> > shown that "individual users" will not fly).
> 
> I don't agree.
> 
> The intellectual property industry gets a very big seat in 
> ICANN but mere possession of a trademark has nothing to do 
> with whether the holder of the mark has acquired a domain name or not.
> 
> Normal internet users - you and I - are just as affected by 
> domain names as is the owner of a trademark.  Just like a 
> trademark, our names can be transgressed, our reputations can 
> be besmirched and diluted.  The only difference is that that 
> we are flesh and blood people rather than some legal 
> abstraction in the form of a corporate owner of a trademark.
> 
> So why do the trademark owners get the ICANN red carpet 
> treatment and the individual users of the internet get the shaft?
> 
> Why are our needs written off as "will not fly" while ICANN 
> accepts the assertions of the intellectual property 
> protection industry without question?
> 
> Vint Cerf likes to say "The Internet is for Everyone".  Seems 
> that that phrase falls flat in the world of ICANN.
> 
> ICANN is incorporated as a "public benefit" corporation.  It 
> is inconsistent with its legal status for ICANN to exclude 
> the public from its decision making processes, while at the 
> same time elevating private commercial interests.
> 
> 		--karl--