[ppml] Revision to 2008-3
owen at delong.com
Tue Apr 1 14:16:25 EDT 2008
I absolutely think that it is vital to be more specific for this policy.
I absolutely oppose the idea of including organizations organized
under 501(c)5, or equivalent, for this purpose, and, there may be
other 501(c) sections which I would not favor. I would say that 501(c)6
should not receive blanket automatic treatment under this policy.
I'm not convinced that 501(c)7 is any more legitimate than 501(c)5.
Personally, I do not believe we should allow the following under the
proposed community networks policies:
Most, if not all 501(c)4
Most, if not all 501(c)6
Most, if not all 501(c)7
Most, if not all 501(c)17
Most, if not all 501(c)19
Here's a stab at a statement that describes what I feel should be
To qualify as a community network under ARIN policy, the network must
be owned and operated by an organization which is organized and/or
chartered as a not-for-profit which is engaged in providing the service
to the benefit of the local community at large and not limited to any
subclass of the community by religion, union membership, pension
status, or any other form of membership requirement other than if
such membership is open to all members of the community with
equal voting status and control of the organization at a cost
which would not reasonably be considered prohibitive to any person
living above the locally defined poverty level.
This probably needs a lot of work, but, it's the best I could do without
copying the tax code and I'm not willing to do that at 3:15 AM (which
is the local time here at the moment).
On Apr 1, 2008, at 11:38 PM, David Farmer wrote:
> I will add that 501(c)3 is only one, the most general and common,
> form of a
> non-profit organization recognized by USIRC, several other 501(c)
> organizations could legitimately sponsor a Community Network,
> including a
> 501(c)6 Chamber of Commerce, 501(c)7 Recreational club, just to name a
> few other possibilities.
> Further, I could easily see a city or other political sub-division
> of government
> sponsoring a Community Network too, and they are not covered by
> 501(c) at
> all. So even if you are only dealing with the US, I think
> specifying 501(c)3
> would not be a good idea. Then if you bring in other countries you
> can't be more specific than non-profit or not-for-profit.
> On 1 Apr 2008 Ray Plzak wrote:
>> An observation. The ARIN region consists of more countries than the
>> US, hence citing sections of the US tax code is probably not a good
>> thing to do. I see that you have included the phrase "or local
>> equivalent" but that is not necessarily clear. Perhaps, simply
>> not for profit would be sufficient.
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
>>> Behalf Of
>>> Owen DeLong
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 12:36 AM
>>> + IRS 501(c)3 or local equivalent not for profit status
>>> should not qualify in my opinion).
> David Farmer Email: farmer at umn.edu
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Minnesota Phone: 612-626-0815
> 2218 University Ave SE Cell: 612-812-9952
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 FAX: 612-626-1818
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the
> ARIN Public Policy
> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net
> if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML