On Monday 16 October 2017 09:13 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:

This is a disappointing statement, but it needs to be understood that this is a dissent from a tiny minority whose ideas were not accepted because they were unrealistic and unattainable.

 

It was already known that proposals for an intergovernmental organization governed by some as-yet-nonexistent form of international law had support from only two or three people, and overwhelmingly strong opposition from everyone else.


Milton

Can you point me to such a proposal in the sub-group's proceedings having been seriously presented and discussed? I myself did not see it. Or are you on the job of creating straw-men!

And it was also clear that petitioning the Trump administration and a Republican Congress for an act of Congress granting ICANN immunity would be a blunder of unprecedented magnitude that would achieve exactly the opposite of the proponents’ stated objectives. 



You often speak about intellectual honesty. Let me take you up on it:  is your problem only about what Trump admin will do with a "jurisdictional immunity for ICANN"  proposal? Were you really ready for it before Trump came to power, and when he will not be in power? I hope you do not run away and actually answer these questions.

parminder

 

While a small minority was wasting time on a futile attempt to turn the clock back to 1997, the rest of us were confronting real, practical jurisdictional issues. We came up with tangible progress on OFAC and choice of law. These recommendations enjoy overwhelming consensus. Thus, I do not see that this dissent causes any problems. Let them display their petulance and in Abu Dhabi  we can discuss and debate it as needed to expose their fallacies and move on.

 

Dr. Milton Mueller

Professor, School of Public Policy

Georgia Institute of Technology

 

IGP_logo_gold block_email sig

 

 

 

 

From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Thiago Braz Jardim Oliveira
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2017 9:14 PM
To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org
Cc: acct-staff@icann.org; gac@icann.org; GAC <gac@gac.icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>
Subject: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Jurisdiction Subgroup. Draft Report. Statement of Brazil. Annex. To be annexed to the draft report. For consideration by the CCWG.

 

Dear all,

 

On behalf of the Brazilian Government, I hereby submit the "Statement of Brazil" and its annex, which are to be annexed to the draft report of the jurisdiction subgroup, submitted on 11 October 2017, for consideration by the CCWG plenary.

 

Best regards,

 

Thiago

 

 

 

De: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] em nome de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com]
Enviado: quinta-feira, 12 de outubro de 2017 23:29
Para: accountability-cross-community@icann.org
Cc: acct-staff@icann.org; ws2-jurisdiction
Assunto: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Jurisdiction Subgroup Draft Report for CCWG-Accountability Plenary Review

All,

 

One of the Subgroup members pointed out a minor editing error in the document.  On pages 13-14, there were several mentions of the RAA, when in fact the language quoted and discussed was from the ICANN Terms and Conditions for Registrar Accreditation Application.  (The reference was correct in the Executive Summary.)  This has now been fixed in the attached.

 

Greg 

 

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:

All,

 

Some minor formatting errors crept into the Report when it was converted from Word to PDF.  A new PDF of the report is attached. I've checked each page to confirm that the formatting errors were resolved.

 

Thank you to Jorge Cancio for catching this problem!

 

Greg

 

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:53 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:

All,

 

I am pleased to submit the Draft Report from the Jurisdiction Subgroup for consideration by the CCWG-Accountability Plenary.

 

It is my understanding that a minority viewpoint is expected to be submitted.  In the interests of time, this will be submitted to the Plenary separately from the Draft Report.

 

During the preparation of the OFAC Recommendation, the Subgroup considered an email where a registrar declined to do business with a potential reseller, based on the registrar’s policy of not doing business with people with Iranian passports.  The Subgroup also learned that this registrar, which had been registering domains for a number of Iranian nationals, refused to continue to do business with them.  The Subgroup has concluded that, to the extent these instances are related to OFAC, the concerns raised by these instances are adequately covered in the Recommendation already without any additional changes.  This is not in any way a comment on the validity of these particular concerns.  The Subgroup will consider creating "stress tests" based on these scenarios.

 

I look forward to the Plenary's reading of the Draft Report.

 

Best regards,

 

Greg Shatan

Rapporteur

 

 



_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community