<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [nc-budget] MY RECOLLECTION OF OUR RESOLUTION OF TODAY
Thank you Chuck for your excellent summary.
I wish to add an important correction: it is about incorporating
"DNSO Professional Support Fund" (not an independent incorporation
of the DNSO; the DNSO is by Bylaws a part of ICANN, and nobody
intends to change it).
To open a bank account, to collect money, and to spend it for NC needs,
a legal frame is necessary. It is the purpose of this association.
And yes, indeed, a non-US centric look, an international legitimacy.
Vany, you can find both texts in our archives.
WILMER and CUTLER final
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-budget/Arc00/msg00239.html
AFNIC final
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-budget/Arc00/msg00255.html
Elisabeth
> From owner-nc-budget@dnso.org Fri Apr 6 14:01 MET 2001
> From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>
> To: "'Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales'" <vany@sdnp.org.pa>, nc-budget@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [nc-budget] MY RECOLLECTION OF OUR RESOLUTION OF TODAY
> Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 07:54:50 -0400
>
> Elisabeth,
>
> It might be helpful if you sent Vany the document for the French non-profit
> organization. I think that would answer some of Vany's questions.
>
> Vany - After lots of discussions over a long period of time, there were only
> two specific proposals submitted for an independent incorporation of the
> DNSO. One was for a U.S. based incorporation submitted by Roger Cochetti
> (from Becky Burr of Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering) and one was from
> Elisabeth. The latter was modified to incorporate some of the desirable
> terms of the document prepared by Becky. Anyone else could have submitted a
> proposal for any other jurisdiction in the world, but they did not. As it
> turned out, the French proposal appeared to be very good because it was easy
> to do, involved minimal cost and gave us more of a non-US centric look.
>
> To start over now and solicit proposals from other jurisdictions would only
> cause additional delays in a process that should have been completed months
> ago.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales [mailto:vany@sdnp.org.pa]
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 10:52 PM
> To: nc-budget@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [nc-budget] MY RECOLLECTION OF OUR RESOLUTION OF TODAY
>
>
> Dear Roger:
>
> I didn't know that the Budget Commitee had the power to take decisions of
> this
> kind. I though that the last word had to be voted by the Names Council
> itself.
>
> Also I didn't know (until you sent yestarday the e-mail saying that there
> won't
> be cost from ICANN to manage DNSO funds voluntarily collected).
>
> Of course, my previous e-mail was clear about that I would prefer another
> organization non-profit managing such funds.
>
> However, I must say that, due decision was taken (I suppouse by majority),
> then
> at least the I must say that, it is right to ask to ICANN to proceed in
> accordance of the instructions of the Names Council.
>
> In the even that the administrators of fund not be ICANN, please would
> anyone
> of you explain me why it was decided that such organization be in France?
> Is
> there anything special or any advantage in France that maybe is not in
> another
> country?
>
> Why to create an new organization? If such organization is to be created I
> wish to know under what basis? Who will be the members or the Board or such
> organization and what basis they will be elected?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance for answer me this questions, since I expressed a
> different position in a previous e-mail and I think that before exposing
> this
> to the Names Council this issue, we have to explain them "why" and "how".
>
> Cheers
> Vany
>
>
> El mié, 04 abr 2001, Cochetti, Roger escribió:
> > The Budget Committee hereby decides to accept the offer of ICANN
> Management
> > to administer the funds voluntarily collected for the DNSO at no charge to
> > the DNSO, understanding, however, that ICANN management will dispense
> these
> > funds according to instructions from the Names Council or its designee,
> > unless ICANN management formally notifies the Names Council and its Budget
> > Committee that it cannot dispense funds as directed by the Names Council
> or
> > its designee because to do so would either be illegal or jeopardize
> ICANN's
> > tax status.
> >
> > Moreover, if ICANN management does not accept this proposal within five
> days
> > of its delivery to them, the Budget Committee decides to proceed with the
> > establishment of a custodial relationship for these voluntary funds by a
> > non-profit corporation that would be organized in, and under the laws of,
> > France; recognizing that this French non-profit organization may establish
> a
> > bank account for the DNSO's voluntary fund with a bank either inside or
> > outside of France.
> --
> Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales
> IT Specialist
> Sustainable Development Networking Programme/Panama
> Tel: (507) 230-4011 exrt 213
> Fax: (507) 230-3455
> e-mail: vany@sdnp.org.pa
> http://www.sdnp.org.pa
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|