[CCWG-ACCT] member organization and single membership structure

[Matthew Shears]

If this would achieve the same result as the broader membership model 
and at the same time be simpler to implement shouldn't it be looked at 
again?  Was there a specific reason it was discounted?

Matthew

On 4/22/2015 2:56 PM, Roelof Meijer wrote:
> Hi Avri,
>
> The sole membership construction, is a possibility described in the 
> legal document in several places: the comments by the legal experts on 
> the PCCWG mechanism template (page 64) and the Community Council 
> mechanism template (page 69). I sent several emails about it to the 
> WP1 list, suggesting to look in the possibility as indeed it would not 
> necessitate every SO and AC to become a legal entity. And, as you do, 
> suggesting: "make the „Community Council” the sole member of ICANN 
> (and thus a formal legal entity), consisting of either the SO and AC 
> chairs or SO/AC elected representatives” (from an email of 14 April).
>
> And I would think it would enable the SO’s and AC’s themselves to 
> continue appointing directors, as they do now. But that’s just 
> guessing, based on the fact that the SO’s and AC’s themselves would 
> not change status
>
> Best,
>
> Roelof
>
> From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>>
> Organization: Technicalities
> Reply-To: "avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>" <avri at acm.org 
> <mailto:avri at acm.org>>
> Date: woensdag 22 april 2015 15:09
> To: "accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>" 
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] member organization and single membership 
> structure
>
> Hi,
>
> On 22-Apr-15 08:26, Roelof Meijer wrote:
>> 2)
>> What I find quite frustrating is that I have raised the point of the 
>> possibility (or not) of a single membership structure – an option 
>> mentioned by Sidley and Adler & Colving in their legal advice – 
>> several times by now without getting any substantial reaction. I am 
>> not aware that any serious effort to investigate this has led to a 
>> formal write-off.
>
> In some way that might lessen the complexity of making most SOAC an 
> individual legal entity.
>
> How would it work?  Would we continue to appoint Directors just as we 
> do now?
>
> Or would there need to be some sort of Members Council that took 
> actions, working simliarly to the the executive board or community 
> council idea?
>
> thanks
>
> avri
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Avast logo <http://www.avast.com/> 	
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- 
Matthew Shears
Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
+ 44 (0)771 247 2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150422/21a4ad91/attachment.html>