Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents

Joop Teernstra (terastra@terabytz.co.nz)
Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:16:46 +1200


At 06:11 22/12/98 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:

>
>We definitely need some lawyerly opinions on this topic. As I said,
>my impression is that from a practical point of view, incorporation
>is far and away the most efficient way to legally insulate the
>members of the DNSO from lawsuits brought against the DNSO. That
>is, we need a corporate shield, either from being part of ICANN, or,
>if that is precluded, through forming our own corporation.
>

Kent, Amadeu, Roberto and all,

Incorporating will shield the members, but it will mean that the SO can
become the target.
This has implications for the SO's fiscal policy. (and the membership fees)

Do you want to create a legal fighting fund, (and create the deep pockets
that makes sueing the SO attractive)
or do you want to stay lean and risk being crippled by the first lost lawsuit?

I had wanted to suggest incorporating in the Netherlands, before I was so
effectively sidetracked by Mr Sondow, because of some fiscal advantages
that make it irrelevant wether the SO is truly non-profit. (as long as
there is no physical HQ)
However, this should be checked independently, as my knowledge of the Dutch
tax laws is not up-to-date.
The Netherlands Antilles would be another option for a respectable
jurisdiction.

--Joop--
http://www.democracy.org.nz/