Not-For-Profit Organizations Constituency: Q&A

The proposed-but-not-yet-ratified Not-for-Profit Organizations Constituency has prepared a "Questions & Answers" document designed specifically to address NCUC member concerns.  Unfortunately, the well-written document failed to achieve its purpose.

NCUC members latched onto the Q&A paper with all the snarling aggression of a barn-yard dog and were very quick to share their views:

KH:  Looking at the IP-owner agenda of the NPOC, it’s no surprise that there is going to be considerable resistance to commercial interests being asserted within the NCSG. Obviously the proper place for its shadowy members is within the Intellectual Property Constituency with the other IP lawyers.

RG:  It seems this trademark group (NPOC) belongs in the CSG since it is primarily concerned with commercial interests - especially trademarks and brands.  It is not enough to be set up as a non-for-profit organization to belong in NCSG.  Thousands of not-for-profit organizations are set up to support commercial interests (like the RIAA, MPAA, IFPI, etc) -- but they are set up to benefit COMMERCE, so they would properly belong in the CSG.  It is important that this distinction is made early-on in the formation of the NCSG - or it will be entirely over-run by commercial interests set up as not-for-profits.

 

DK:  If, in fact, Red Cross is trying to "infiltrate" the non-commercial community at ICANN in order to contribute a point of view more properly voiced in the IPC (this is the elephant in the living room, right?), then I would think it really ought to join the IPC, where it will find common purpose.