Ellen Rony a �crit:
>
> I think these constituency lines are not going to be so definitive as you
> suggest. If someone adds a Netscape icon to his/her website, is that a
> commercial use.
Yes, it is. But whether a website is considered commercial should
depend on whether or not the entity that registered it or owned it
was a commercial entity as defined in the commerce laws. The domain
name more than the website would be the determinant. The
constituency is for "non-commercial domain name holders" not "
non-commercial website administrators".
> If I link my book title to its listing at amazon.com, is
> that a commercial use even though I transact no business directly?
It obviously is a commercial use. Or isn't amazon.com a commercial
enterprise? OTOH, if you aren't engaging in commerce directly and
your website isn't registered to a commercial enterprise, the fact
that you have a link on it to a commercial enterprise probably isn't
enough to qualify it as a commercial website. But once again, it's
the domain name that counts, according to the definition of the
constituency.
> And after you answer those questions, here are a few more:
>
> 1. What criteria will be applied by ICANN to acknowledge a new
> constituency? (I'm thinking education constituency and name reseller
> constituency).
I have no idea. There's no longer any telling what ICANN will or
will not do. Since they've gotten away with every revision of their
own bylaws, and with violating the law of non-profit membership
organizations which says that they must create a membership and hold
elections before conducting business and creating policy, they
apparently feel free to do just as they please, witness their
changing of the definition of the DNSO so that it's deprived of most
of its functions:
"...with respect to policy issues relating to top-level
domains."
instead of the former:
"...TLDs, including operation, assignment and management
of the domain name system and other related subjects."
> 2. Is there a limit to the number of constituencies that can be
> recognized? Doesn't appear so from the DNSO concepts ICANN adopted.
ICANN will decide that as it suits them.
> 3. Can the Names Council just grow and grow as new constituencies are
> added?
If ICANN wishes it so. Or, if they change their mind, they can
reduce it to three members, chosen by them. Or eliminate it entirely
and replace it with a committee appointed by the Board, as they've
done with the Government and Root Server advisory committees.
> 4. Why does a constituency of 249 (ccTLDs) get the same
> representation as one of 2,000 (say, trademark)?
Because the ICANN Board wants it so.
> 5. Why do business people conceivably get to be in three constituencies
> (say business, ISP and trademark), while non-commercial, by exclusion, get
> to be in only one?
Because the ICANN Board wants the business interests to control the
Internet.
> 6. What are the objectives behind dividing the membership pie into these
> constituencies? Oh, I know. More acronyms. Or to keep us battling over
> constituency definitions while the really important matters get decided by
> the ICANN board -- behind closed doors.
There, you see? You answered it yourself. The questions weren't so
difficult. :)
