Here is a petition for ILCA to redo the Fundamental Rule change vote.
The statements by ILCA promoting the Fundamental Laser Rule change were materially incorrect and may have significantly biased the results. This petition requests that ILCA set aside the rule change vote and immediately revote on the proposed Fundamental Rule change.
The incorrect statements by ILCA in promoting the rule change were:
1. ‘a builder also needs a building agreement from Bruce Kirby or Bruce Kirby Inc. This provision is mostly historical. The rule was instituted at a time when Bruce Kirby held certain design rights.'
2. ‘The lawyers also informed us that the Kirby design patents had in fact expired. ... Therefore, we are proposing to change the rule to eliminate the 'building agreement from Bruce Kirby or Bruce Kirby Inc' requirement.'
Statement 1 is incorrect because the building agreement was not historical and was in fact highly relevant due to existing builder contracts.
Statement 2 is incorrect and misleading. There never were patents and this statement gave the impression that Kirby rights had lapsed.
I don't want to litigate what is true and false. Rather, I want to see if there is a critical mass to get a more accurate membership vote on the future of the class.
Currently ISAF and ILCA are proceeding using the Fundamental Rule change vote. Whoever wins the court case, basing the future of the class on such a deeply flawed vote is unwise.