My understanding of Goran's use of organization is as Greg described below. This is what Goran explained to me in Hyderabad. The Board is seen as separate. Perhaps we go for something super simple and understandable to describe all parts of ICANN as the "ICANN System" - encompasses Board, Staff, Volunteers, SO/AC's, EC, I*, etc. Lori Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-704-0408, Skype: lsschulman [cid:image005.jpg@01D270D2.1801CD20] From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 4:53 PM To: Schweighofer Erich <erich.schweighofer@univie.ac.at> Cc: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Terminology for the ICANN trinity I think it makes sense to refer to the legal entity known as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers as the "Corporation" (which is a term of US law (not just California law) used for non-profit incorporated entities (including public interest entities, charities, foundations, membership organizations, etc.)). Where we are referring to something other than the that legal entity, we should not use "corporation." I believe that Goran is using Organization to refer to the "staff" (CEO on down, both employees and those who may be engaged on an "independent contractor" or "consultant" basis), but not to the Board (which is also part of the Corporation), but we may want to clarify. I agree with Stephen Deerhake that we need to be mindful of existing terms and use them as our basis. The corollary to that is to avoid using any currently-used terms differently than their current use -- so we should not contradict Goran's use of "organization" (once we confirm exactly how he uses it and what the "boundaries" of his definition are). Greg Greg Shatan C: 917-816-6428 S: gsshatan Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428 gregshatanipc@gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:28 AM, Schweighofer Erich <erich.schweighofer@univie.ac.at<mailto:erich.schweighofer@univie.ac.at>> wrote: It is good to work on terminology but it should be a common effort and reflecting real language use. ICANN-speak is already a strong "border" joining our community. Some ontology work can help. I would prefer organization - corporation is very much a term of California law not much used outside for a public purpose association. Best regards, Erich Schweighofer -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] Im Auftrag von Bruce Tonkin Gesendet: Sonntag, 05. März 2017 01:29 An: accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Terminology for the ICANN trinity
Make it as simple as possible so that ICANN outsiders will understand it.
Thanks to the 1000+ acronyms ICANN has created enough confusion not only among the "people in the street" who arer using domainnames but also among Internet policy makers who are not ICANN insiders but have to deal with implications conming fro domainnames.
Yes - where possible I prefer we use terminology in common use in the wider community. I would generally think that "organization" or "corporation" refers to Board, staff, and contractors. Regards, Bruce Tonkin _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community ________________________________
