<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Steve,<br>
<br>
Members of the Business Constituency are aware that standard
incorporation language (in California, Delaware, New York, ...)
contains phrasing of the form "any lawful purpose".<br>
<br>
Members of the Business Constituency are also aware that the
Corporation Board "
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
at its March 2010 meeting in Nairobi, Kenya, passed resolutions
recognizing the importance of an inclusive New <abbr class=""
title="generic Top Level Domain">gTLD</abbr> Program, and
requesting stakeholders to form a Working Group to develop
sustainable support needy applicants for new gTLDs."<br>
<br>
Yet the language of the 4th Business Constituency "Stress Tests"
[1] posits the Corporation's use of "registration fees to fund
grants to developing nations or other worthy causes" and further
declares this hypothetical use by the Corporation of its funds as
an "expands[ion of] scope beyond its limited technical mission".<br>
<br>
In your revised language this restriction is expanded from the
Corporation's recurring revenues to include its recurring revenues
and its reserves.<br>
<br>
Without commenting on the rational contained in both the original
and your revised language, I must ask, how can an accountability
issue arise from something that (a) falls within "any lawful
purpose" and (b) has been institutionalized by the Corporation as
a consequence of the Board's 2010 resolution?<br>
<br>
Thanks in advance for your clarification.<br>
<br>
Eric Brunner-Williams<br>
Eugene, Oregon<br>
<br>
[1] http://bizconst.org/stresstests<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>