RE: [ga] 6000+ unique At Large Members?

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:

> the elections list can't be used -- ICANN always took the position that
> privacy rules prohibited contacting those people by or for the GA...

However section 6330 of the California corporations code - ICANN *is* a
California corporation - requires that "members" have the right to
"Inspect and copy the record of all the members' names, addresses and
voting rights..."

(See 
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=corp&group=06001-07000&file=6330-6338 
)

The only question is whether ICANN's assertion that it has no members is
anything more than a self serving statement that does nothing to diminish
the statutory definition of a "member".  I believe that ICANN has not
avoided the statutory definition.

See my note on all of this at 
http://www.cavebear.com/icann-board/platform.htm#full-members

		--karl--




--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html