Re: [Membership] Fees for Organizations

[Mikael Pawlo <mpawlo@algonet.se>]

Okay, I've been silent for a while now, so I'll just jump back into the
game again .-)

At 12:12 -0400 99-05-02, Esther Dyson wrote:
>so make it a smaller percentage of revenues, or define it differently. I.e.
>go with your second paragraph.

A revenue percentage seems like a fair way of dealing with member fees at
first glance. However, when you look further into the issue you will see
that such a model won't be as fair as you first thought. If you consider
entities with only a smaller part of revenues deriving from to ICANN
related activities, but at the same time is depending on the functionality
on ICANN or want a say in the decisions and therefore join ICANN, the cost
- if percentage fixed, will be far too high, in relation to the value
presented. Maybe such companies, like postal services. telcos and law
firms, should not be members of ICANN, but on the other hand I think it
would be a good way to establish ICANN on a broad not-too-diverse (the
consensus issue should maybe be abolished now, no?) ground.

Still, there are few ways other than percentage fees which satisfies the
need of a simple and non-discriminatory base for member fees. I can't think
of any alternatives. Can you?

Best Regards,

Mikael Pawlo

_________________________________________________________________________

						ICQ:35638414

					  	mailto:mpawlo@algonet.se
					  	http://www.algonet.se/~mpawlo