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

[Eric Weisberg <weisberg@texoma.net>]

Karl Auerbach wrote:

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

You might also consider whether Cal-Almond, Inc. v. U.S. Dept. Of Agriculture,
960 F.2d 105, 109 (9th Cir. 1992) applies.
> Cal-Almond argues that there is a First Amendment right of
> access to voter lists.  See generally
> Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court, 478 U.S. 1, 106 S.Ct. 2735,
> 92 L.Ed.2d 1 (1986) (Press-Enterprise
> II).  In considering claims of First Amendment access a court 
> must look to two considerations: (1) whether
> historical experience counsels in favor of public access, and (2) whether
> public access would play a "significant
> positive role in the functioning of the particular process in question."
> Id. at 8, 106 S.Ct. at 2740; Times Mirror Co.
> v. United States, 873 F.2d 1210, 1213 (9th Cir. 1989).  It seems
> likely that a tradition of public access to voter lists exists.