[Community] Mintues: Steward's Council Telecon Tuesday 2/21 9AM PT

[Brett McDowell]

Drummond, thanks for taking the minutes.  But I have a few key  
correction requests to the minutes, see below:

On Feb 21, 2007, at 2:20 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:

> Following are minutes from today’s Steward’s Council call:
>
>
>
> ATTENDING
>
>
>
> Dan Perry
>
> Nick Givotovsky
>
> Brett McDowell
>
> Scott Blackmer
>
> Drummond Reed
>
>
>
>
>
> Drummond started the discussion by pointing to Eugene’s email to  
> the list (copied below) suggesting that the most important initial  
> decision is the business model required to sustain Identity Commons  
> as an ongoing organization.
>
>
>
> Brett made the point that full industry consortiums, to do “real  
> work”, typically require at least a half-million dollar annual budget.
Should read: Brett made the point that typical industry consortia  
require anywhere from $250k to  half-million dollar annual budget to  
get their work done (association management, marketing, events, IT,  
professional services).
>
>
> Scott said that many organizations spend $2-$3K per month for  
> outsourced association management services, and larger  
> organizations will spend $100K+ per year on that same function.
Should read, I believe: Scott said that many organizations spend $2- 
$3K per month for outsourced association management services, and  
larger organizations will spend as much as $20-30k per month on that  
same function.
>
>
> The key question is whether Identity Commons needs such  
> infrastructure, i.e., will it will undertake functions such as  
> meetings, conferences, intellectual property rights (IPR)  
> management, or certification that require extensive legal counsel  
> or external association management services?
>
>
>
> It was agreed that to answer this question, we really need the  
> input of the Working Groups about what they need IC to provide for  
> them. We proposed doing a simple survey via email of the Stewards  
> for each working group. We developed the following checklist of  
> survey questions:
>
>
>
> PART A: COLLABORATIVE TOOLS & SUPPORT
>
>
>
> 1) Mailing list
>
>
>
> 2) Wiki
>
>
>
> 3) Conference calls
>
>
>
> 4) Face-to-face meetings
>
>
>
> 5) Staff support
>
>
>
> 6) Other functions
>
>
>
> PART B: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS HOLDING/OVERSIGHT/MANAGEMENT
>
>
>
> 1) Binding intellectual property policy developed by Identity Commons
>
>
>
> 2) Serving as a trustee for holding intellectual property rights  
> for the benefit of the community (vs. such rights being held  
> directly by the Working Group or some other body)
>
>
>
> 3) Registration, oversight, and management of the Identity Commons  
> trademark for use by your Working Group
>
>
>
> 4) Registration, oversight, and management of your own trademarks  
> for your Working Group
>
>
>
> 5) Certification or logo programs (that are managed via trademark  
> rights, but involve a separate activity to manage the use of those  
> rights.
>
>
>
> 6) Antitrust umbrella (the need to host or facilitate discussions  
> among competitors on ways to cooperate or interoperability)
>
>
>
> **********
>
>
>
> Dan made the observation that although Identity Commons is  
> committed to being an international organization, to save money  
> Stewards Council could consider the possiblity of incorporating  
> first in the US, then later do so internationally as needed.
>
>
>
> There was further discussion of the overall sustainability model.  
> We agreed that there are basically two paths: a very lightweight  
> model, based purely on donations and with little or no staffing, or  
> a heavier weight model, in which staff support is necessary, and  
> which will require a higher budget and thus likely more than just a  
> donation-based model.
>
>
>
> There was agreement that for the survey, we need to frame the  
> questionaire in terms of establishing a 2007 budget for Identity  
> Commons, and explain that this will help determine the most  
> feasible sustainability model and method of incorporation. This  
> will also clarify what Identity Commons can and cannot provide to  
> Working Groups.
>
>
>
> Brett asked about whether “convening the community” should be the  
> focus of one of the Working Groups or whether there are individuals  
> (such as Kaliya or Eugene) that may wish to be contracted with by  
> Identity Commons itself to do this. This merits further discussion  
> with Kaliya or Eugene or anyone else potentially interested in this  
> role.
Should read: Brett shared the observation that Eugene runs Identity  
Commons and Kaliya runs the Identity Commons events today (aka IOS or  
IIW along with Phil).  Will these folks who currently form the  
"staff" of Identity Commons continue to provide these "staff"  
functions for free on an ongoing basis?  These are questions Brett  
felt the Stewards Council needs to ask before finalizing a budget.

(note: no one took the action to ask Eugene or Kaliya so perhaps  
these minutes serve the purpose of asking that question.  Given the  
nature of the discussion I don't believe it belongs on a mailing  
list.  I suggest this is essentially an open call to anyone who feels  
they have a role to play "on staff" at Identity Commons once it forms  
to tell one of the Stewards so they can represent the potential  
"staff costs" in budget discussions... obviously recusing themselves  
from such discussions).

>
>
> ACTION ITEMS
>
>
>
> * Drummond to send an email to the list asking for all Stewards to  
> answer the above questionaire on behalf of their Working Group as  
> to their needs.
>
>
>
> NEXT CALL
>
>
>
> * Next week, 2/28, at the same time, 9AM Pacific.
>
>
>
> =Drummond
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: community-bounces at idcommons.net [mailto:community- 
> bounces at idcommons.net] On Behalf Of Eugene Eric Kim
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:33 PM
> To: community at idcommons.net
> Subject: Re: [Community] Incorporation
>
>
>
> Daniel Perry wrote:
>
> > Followup emails to Mr. Kehl revealed that while they do not  
> charge an
>
> > annual retainer, they will bill at the USD280 rate for any and  
> all work
>
> > required. While their fee structure is likely competitive,  
> whether we
>
> > use Mr. Kehl's firm or First Law International, it appears that  
> having a
>
> > Swiss incorporation will necessitate a substantial upfront cost  
> ($5,000
>
> > minimum) and a large annual legal budget ($10,000 plus). Before  
> we head
>
> > down that road we best reevaluate what business model Identity  
> Commons
>
> > is going to use. While we can, to some limited extent, count upon  
> the
>
> > generosity of the initial sponsors, can we say that we will  
> always be
>
> > able to find such generous sponsors?
>
>
>
> I think we've reached a gut check point.  At our last call, you  
> suggested
>
> U.S. incorporation would cost $2-5K up-front.  How much do you  
> think the
>
> legal costs would be?
>
>
>
> We've also been talking about $15K infrastructure costs/year.  With  
> the
>
> Swiss incorporation, that means we would have about $25K in  
> operational
>
> costs alone.  That's not bad in the grand scheme of things, but  
> it's also
>
> not light, lightweight.
>
>
>
> The question is, what's our business model?  If it's sponsorships, we
>
> have to factor in the costs of getting those sponsorships.  At  
> minimum, I
>
> think that number is another $25K, which brings total operational  
> costs
>
> to $50K/year.  That's equivalent to half a reasonably compensated,
>
> full-time executive director, which is pretty good considering the  
> scope
>
> of what we're discussing.  But it's still $50K/year.
>
>
>
> If this scope is accurate, then the cost difference between Swiss and
>
> U.S. incorporation is still worth it, given the expected benefits of
>
> international incorporation.
>
>
>
> The key question here (and the key topic of discussion for tomorrow's
>
> call) is, what's the business model?
>
>
>
> =Eugene
>
>
>
> --
>
> ====================================================================== 
> ===
>
> Eugene Eric Kim ................................... http://xri.net/ 
> =eekim
>
> Blue Oxen Associates ........................... http:// 
> www.blueoxen.com/
>
> ====================================================================== 
> ===
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community mailing list
> Community at idcommons.net
> http://mail.idcommons.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.idcommons.net/pipermail/community/attachments/20070221/663c896f/attachment-0001.htm