Dear all, In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8...> Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing. Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims. The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team. I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience. Best regards, León
Hi all, As suggested, I've re-worked the initial set of legal questions based upon the input from yesterday's CCWG call, and have the following legal scoping draft to propose: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA... Please add any comments or suggested edits to the document for incorporation by the legal sub-team. The draft also attached as .pdf. Thanks, Robin On Feb 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8...
Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing.
Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims.
The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team.
I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience.
Best regards, <CCWGLegalquestions.pdf>
León
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Dear All Pls find attached my comments in a revision marked version Kavouss 2015-02-26 3:13 GMT+01:00 Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org>:
Hi all,
As suggested, I've re-worked the initial set of legal questions based upon the input from yesterday's CCWG call, and have the following legal scoping draft to propose:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA...
Please add any comments or suggested edits to the document for incorporation by the legal sub-team.
The draft also attached as .pdf.
Thanks, Robin
On Feb 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8...
Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing.
Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims.
The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team.
I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience.
Best regards, <CCWGLegalquestions.pdf>
León
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Dear Eberhard, PDF of Kavouss' comments attached. Best, Adam -----Original Message----- From: Dr Eberhard Lisse <el@lisse.NA> Organization: Dr Eberhard W Lisse Reply-To: "el@lisse.NA" <el@lisse.NA> Date: Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 9:07 PM To: "accountability-cross-community@icann.org" <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Draft legal questions
Thanks,
can this be posted in PDF?
el
On 2015-02-26 14:01, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
Dear All Pls find attached my comments in a revision marked version Kavouss
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Thank you Robin for this good work. Speaking personally, I’d like to suggest a few additional lines of inquiry for independent counsel. 1. Can we get advice on what interim mechanism/caretaker board arrangements could be in place if the board is spilled? 2. On money awards (for instance, Bruce and I chatted online about a TLD applicant making a claim to get the application fee returned), can they be limited to direct damages under Cal. law, excluding indirect, consequential and other damages if that is what the community decides? 3. Can disincentives to frivolous claims be created, such as an award of costs to defend against frivolous claims? 4. Can inconsequential claims be barred somehow (I realize this could face significant definitional challenges)? 5. Can IRP claims be premised on an obligation that the claimant first file for board reconsideration, allowing the board an opportunity to re-check its action? 6. With respect to such limitations, can they be effectively created in boilerplate contract language in clauses where there is frequently little wiggle room in contract negotiations? I look forward to the call later today. Best regards, David David McAuley International Policy Manager Verisign Inc. 703-948-4154 From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Robin Gross Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:14 PM To: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Accountability Cross Community Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Draft legal questions Hi all, As suggested, I've re-worked the initial set of legal questions based upon the input from yesterday's CCWG call, and have the following legal scoping draft to propose: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA... Please add any comments or suggested edits to the document for incorporation by the legal sub-team. The draft also attached as .pdf. Thanks, Robin On Feb 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: Dear all, In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8... Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing. Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims. The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team. I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience. Best regards, <CCWGLegalquestions.pdf> León _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Thanks Robin and Léon for the drafts. For some reason, I am unable to access the google drive docs, so I am sending my comments (as a representative of the Brazilian government) through this email: -> In the "CCWGLegalquestions" document, under section "Issues related with jurisdictional matters", I suggest the addition of the following question: "Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the mechanisms addressed in the preceding questions (i.e. dismissal of individual Board members, IRP overthrowing Board decisions, requirements for the appeals panel, membership structure), do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country?" -> Under the same section, I would remove question 'c', as the term 'best legal conditions' seems very vague and could potentially lead to unintentionally biased answers. I am not sure if Robin's document is intended to replace the "CCWGLegalquestions" file. If that is the case, I would rephrase the fifth question under section "Specific Questions Related to Goals and Concerns" in the following way: -> Which legal jurisdiction (including the possibility of international jurisdiction) provides for the ideal balance between community control, technical stability, and responsible corporate governance given the CCWG’s stated goals and concerns? Should ICANN consider relocating to another legal jurisdiction (outside of California), and if so, where and why? Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the CCWG's goals and concerns, do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country? In order to avoid confusion, it is important to note that "relocating ICANN to another legal jurisdiction" does not necessarily mean moving ICANN's headquarters to another country/state. I thought it would be worth mentioning it as in previous discussions this important distinction has not been stressed out. Kind regards, Sec. Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva Divisão de Sociedade da Informação (DI) Ministério das Relações Exteriores T: + 55 61 2030-6609 -----Mensagem original----- De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Em nome de Robin Gross Enviada em: quarta-feira, 25 de fevereiro de 2015 23:14 Para: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Accountability Cross Community Assunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Draft legal questions Hi all, As suggested, I've re-worked the initial set of legal questions based upon the input from yesterday's CCWG call, and have the following legal scoping draft to propose: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA...> Please add any comments or suggested edits to the document for incorporation by the legal sub-team. The draft also attached as .pdf. Thanks, Robin On Feb 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: Dear all, In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8... Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing. Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims. The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team. I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience. Best regards, <CCWGLegalquestions.pdf> León _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Hello all, Thanks for the feedback and good suggestions for improvements to the draft legal scoping document. I've tried to incorporate the various edits to the current version of the document, which can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA... Please let me know if I've missed any or if there are other comments on this draft legal scoping document. Thanks, Robin On Feb 27, 2015, at 10:25 AM, Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva wrote:
Thanks Robin and Léon for the drafts. For some reason, I am unable to access the google drive docs, so I am sending my comments (as a representative of the Brazilian government) through this email:
-> In the "CCWGLegalquestions" document, under section "Issues related with jurisdictional matters", I suggest the addition of the following question:
"Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the mechanisms addressed in the preceding questions (i.e. dismissal of individual Board members, IRP overthrowing Board decisions, requirements for the appeals panel, membership structure), do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country?"
-> Under the same section, I would remove question 'c', as the term 'best legal conditions' seems very vague and could potentially lead to unintentionally biased answers.
I am not sure if Robin's document is intended to replace the "CCWGLegalquestions" file. If that is the case, I would rephrase the fifth question under section "Specific Questions Related to Goals and Concerns" in the following way:
-> Which legal jurisdiction (including the possibility of international jurisdiction) provides for the ideal balance between community control, technical stability, and responsible corporate governance given the CCWG’s stated goals and concerns? Should ICANN consider relocating to another legal jurisdiction (outside of California), and if so, where and why? Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the CCWG's goals and concerns, do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country?
In order to avoid confusion, it is important to note that "relocating ICANN to another legal jurisdiction" does not necessarily mean moving ICANN's headquarters to another country/state. I thought it would be worth mentioning it as in previous discussions this important distinction has not been stressed out.
Kind regards,
Sec. Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva Divisão de Sociedade da Informação (DI) Ministério das Relações Exteriores T: + 55 61 2030-6609
-----Mensagem original----- De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Em nome de Robin Gross Enviada em: quarta-feira, 25 de fevereiro de 2015 23:14 Para: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Accountability Cross Community Assunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Draft legal questions
Hi all,
As suggested, I've re-worked the initial set of legal questions based upon the input from yesterday's CCWG call, and have the following legal scoping draft to propose: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDAF3A/edit?usp=sharing<https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDAF3A/edit?usp=sharing>
Please add any comments or suggested edits to the document for incorporation by the legal sub-team.
The draft also attached as .pdf.
Thanks, Robin
On Feb 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8...
Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing.
Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims.
The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team.
I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience.
Best regards, <CCWGLegalquestions.pdf>
León
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Also attached this time as a .pdf. On Mar 2, 2015, at 11:40 AM, Robin Gross wrote:
Hello all,
Thanks for the feedback and good suggestions for improvements to the draft legal scoping document. I've tried to incorporate the various edits to the current version of the document, which can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA...
Please let me know if I've missed any or if there are other comments on this draft legal scoping document.
Thanks, Robin
On Feb 27, 2015, at 10:25 AM, Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva wrote:
Thanks Robin and Léon for the drafts. For some reason, I am unable to access the google drive docs, so I am sending my comments (as a representative of the Brazilian government) through this email:
-> In the "CCWGLegalquestions" document, under section "Issues related with jurisdictional matters", I suggest the addition of the following question:
"Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the mechanisms addressed in the preceding questions (i.e. dismissal of individual Board members, IRP overthrowing Board decisions, requirements for the appeals panel, membership structure), do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country?"
-> Under the same section, I would remove question 'c', as the term 'best legal conditions' seems very vague and could potentially lead to unintentionally biased answers.
I am not sure if Robin's document is intended to replace the "CCWGLegalquestions" file. If that is the case, I would rephrase the fifth question under section "Specific Questions Related to Goals and Concerns" in the following way:
-> Which legal jurisdiction (including the possibility of international jurisdiction) provides for the ideal balance between community control, technical stability, and responsible corporate governance given the CCWG’s stated goals and concerns? Should ICANN consider relocating to another legal jurisdiction (outside of California), and if so, where and why? Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the CCWG's goals and concerns, do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country?
In order to avoid confusion, it is important to note that "relocating ICANN to another legal jurisdiction" does not necessarily mean moving ICANN's headquarters to another country/state. I thought it would be worth mentioning it as in previous discussions this important distinction has not been stressed out.
Kind regards,
Sec. Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva Divisão de Sociedade da Informação (DI) Ministério das Relações Exteriores T: + 55 61 2030-6609
-----Mensagem original----- De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Em nome de Robin Gross Enviada em: quarta-feira, 25 de fevereiro de 2015 23:14 Para: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Accountability Cross Community Assunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Draft legal questions
Hi all,
As suggested, I've re-worked the initial set of legal questions based upon the input from yesterday's CCWG call, and have the following legal scoping draft to propose: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDAF3A/edit?usp=sharing<https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDAF3A/edit?usp=sharing>
Please add any comments or suggested edits to the document for incorporation by the legal sub-team.
The draft also attached as .pdf.
Thanks, Robin
On Feb 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8...
Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing.
Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims.
The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team.
I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience.
Best regards, <CCWGLegalquestions.pdf>
León
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Why are we not asking the legal experts on what (legal) foundation the relationship between the IANA Function Manager and a ccTLD Manager actually rests? Can't be the Teranode contract (at least not) for the predating TLDs, in fact one starts wondering who In fact, working for whom and when even invented domains... el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Mar 2, 2015, at 22:17, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Also attached this time as a .pdf. <CCWG-ACCT-Legal_Scoping-2.pdf>
On Mar 2, 2015, at 11:40 AM, Robin Gross wrote:
Hello all,
Thanks for the feedback and good suggestions for improvements to the draft legal scoping document. I've tried to incorporate the various edits to the current version of the document, which can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA...
Please let me know if I've missed any or if there are other comments on this draft legal scoping document.
Thanks, Robin [...]
Dear Eberhard, Thanks for this input. We will be including it in the document. Best regards, León
El 02/03/2015, a las 15:17, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> escribió:
Why are we not asking the legal experts on what (legal) foundation the relationship between the IANA Function Manager and a ccTLD Manager actually rests?
Can't be the Teranode contract (at least not) for the predating TLDs, in fact one starts wondering who In fact, working for whom and when even invented domains...
el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Mar 2, 2015, at 22:17, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org <mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> wrote:
Also attached this time as a .pdf. <CCWG-ACCT-Legal_Scoping-2.pdf>
On Mar 2, 2015, at 11:40 AM, Robin Gross wrote:
Hello all,
Thanks for the feedback and good suggestions for improvements to the draft legal scoping document. I've tried to incorporate the various edits to the current version of the document, which can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA... <https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA...>
Please let me know if I've missed any or if there are other comments on this draft legal scoping document.
Thanks, Robin [...]
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
hi all I am a little concerned with how long the list of questions is - will formulate more intelligent thoughts than that for the call tonight. It seems to me we should focus our legal requests like a laser beam on the smallest and simplest possible set of questions so that the advice a) is as cost-effective as possible and b) as concrete as possible. best Jordan On 3 March 2015 at 10:13, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> wrote:
Dear Eberhard,
Thanks for this input. We will be including it in the document.
Best regards,
León
El 02/03/2015, a las 15:17, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> escribió:
Why are we not asking the legal experts on what (legal) foundation the relationship between the IANA Function Manager and a ccTLD Manager actually rests?
Can't be the Teranode contract (at least not) for the predating TLDs, in fact one starts wondering who In fact, working for whom and when even invented domains...
el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Mar 2, 2015, at 22:17, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
Also attached this time as a .pdf.
<CCWG-ACCT-Legal_Scoping-2.pdf>
On Mar 2, 2015, at 11:40 AM, Robin Gross wrote:
Hello all,
Thanks for the feedback and good suggestions for improvements to the draft legal scoping document. I've tried to incorporate the various edits to the current version of the document, which can be found here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA...
Please let me know if I've missed any or if there are other comments on this draft legal scoping document.
Thanks, Robin [...]
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ* 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter *A better world through a better Internet *
In the "proposals under construction" paragraph, three mechanisms that we identified (ref. our „scope, powers and mechanisms" document) seem to be missing: existing SO/AC structure, permananet CCWG, supervisory board/two tier board construction Cheers, Roelof From: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> Date: maandag 2 maart 2015 21:17 To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] RES: Draft legal questions Also attached this time as a .pdf. On Mar 2, 2015, at 11:40 AM, Robin Gross wrote: Hello all, Thanks for the feedback and good suggestions for improvements to the draft legal scoping document. I've tried to incorporate the various edits to the current version of the document, which can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA... Please let me know if I've missed any or if there are other comments on this draft legal scoping document. Thanks, Robin On Feb 27, 2015, at 10:25 AM, Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva wrote: Thanks Robin and Léon for the drafts. For some reason, I am unable to access the google drive docs, so I am sending my comments (as a representative of the Brazilian government) through this email: -> In the "CCWGLegalquestions" document, under section "Issues related with jurisdictional matters", I suggest the addition of the following question: "Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the mechanisms addressed in the preceding questions (i.e. dismissal of individual Board members, IRP overthrowing Board decisions, requirements for the appeals panel, membership structure), do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country?" -> Under the same section, I would remove question 'c', as the term 'best legal conditions' seems very vague and could potentially lead to unintentionally biased answers. I am not sure if Robin's document is intended to replace the "CCWGLegalquestions" file. If that is the case, I would rephrase the fifth question under section "Specific Questions Related to Goals and Concerns" in the following way: -> Which legal jurisdiction (including the possibility of international jurisdiction) provides for the ideal balance between community control, technical stability, and responsible corporate governance given the CCWG’s stated goals and concerns? Should ICANN consider relocating to another legal jurisdiction (outside of California), and if so, where and why? Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the CCWG's goals and concerns, do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country? In order to avoid confusion, it is important to note that "relocating ICANN to another legal jurisdiction" does not necessarily mean moving ICANN's headquarters to another country/state. I thought it would be worth mentioning it as in previous discussions this important distinction has not been stressed out. Kind regards, Sec. Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva Divisão de Sociedade da Informação (DI) Ministério das Relações Exteriores T: + 55 61 2030-6609 -----Mensagem original----- De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Em nome de Robin Gross Enviada em: quarta-feira, 25 de fevereiro de 2015 23:14 Para: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Accountability Cross Community Assunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Draft legal questions Hi all, As suggested, I've re-worked the initial set of legal questions based upon the input from yesterday's CCWG call, and have the following legal scoping draft to propose: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDAF3A/edit?usp=sharing<https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDAF3A/edit?usp=sharing> Please add any comments or suggested edits to the document for incorporation by the legal sub-team. The draft also attached as .pdf. Thanks, Robin On Feb 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: Dear all, In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8... Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing. Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims. The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team. I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience. Best regards, <CCWGLegalquestions.pdf> León _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Thanks for the opportunity for review of the document. I made some proposed edits and comments in the Google docs document. Please let me know if you have questions. Best, Samantha From: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org<mailto:robin@ipjustice.org>> Date: Monday, March 2, 2015 at 11:40 AM To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] RES: Draft legal questions Hello all, Thanks for the feedback and good suggestions for improvements to the draft legal scoping document. I've tried to incorporate the various edits to the current version of the document, which can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDA... Please let me know if I've missed any or if there are other comments on this draft legal scoping document. Thanks, Robin On Feb 27, 2015, at 10:25 AM, Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva wrote: Thanks Robin and Léon for the drafts. For some reason, I am unable to access the google drive docs, so I am sending my comments (as a representative of the Brazilian government) through this email: -> In the "CCWGLegalquestions" document, under section "Issues related with jurisdictional matters", I suggest the addition of the following question: "Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the mechanisms addressed in the preceding questions (i.e. dismissal of individual Board members, IRP overthrowing Board decisions, requirements for the appeals panel, membership structure), do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country?" -> Under the same section, I would remove question 'c', as the term 'best legal conditions' seems very vague and could potentially lead to unintentionally biased answers. I am not sure if Robin's document is intended to replace the "CCWGLegalquestions" file. If that is the case, I would rephrase the fifth question under section "Specific Questions Related to Goals and Concerns" in the following way: -> Which legal jurisdiction (including the possibility of international jurisdiction) provides for the ideal balance between community control, technical stability, and responsible corporate governance given the CCWG’s stated goals and concerns? Should ICANN consider relocating to another legal jurisdiction (outside of California), and if so, where and why? Considering that ICANN's current jurisdiction may eventually impose restrictions with regards to some of the CCWG's goals and concerns, do these same restrictions also potentially apply in a scenario where ICANN has an international status, i.e. it is not subject to the legislation of a single country? In order to avoid confusion, it is important to note that "relocating ICANN to another legal jurisdiction" does not necessarily mean moving ICANN's headquarters to another country/state. I thought it would be worth mentioning it as in previous discussions this important distinction has not been stressed out. Kind regards, Sec. Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva Divisão de Sociedade da Informação (DI) Ministério das Relações Exteriores T: + 55 61 2030-6609 -----Mensagem original----- De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] Em nome de Robin Gross Enviada em: quarta-feira, 25 de fevereiro de 2015 23:14 Para: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Accountability Cross Community Assunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Draft legal questions Hi all, As suggested, I've re-worked the initial set of legal questions based upon the input from yesterday's CCWG call, and have the following legal scoping draft to propose: https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDAF3A/edit?usp=sharing<https://docs.google.com/document/d/132V7P8nmyalhoso7zcevjW3_ox1laXn5JIEH3dDAF3A/edit?usp=sharing> Please add any comments or suggested edits to the document for incorporation by the legal sub-team. The draft also attached as .pdf. Thanks, Robin On Feb 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: Dear all, In the following link you will find the first draft set of questions developed by the legal sub-team for your review: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xi-hs-i5z0XSicHxMjJlLiQ4xhFo1_IOQnEMXDp8... Please keep in mind that this is work in progress and the list of questions is not a closed list but rather a list subject to add questions that are still missing. Robin Gross is in the process of drafting a framing letter that will provide context to the external lawyers as to where we are at now and our aims. The document is enabled so anyone with the link may comment but not edit. Please add any suggested edits as comments so they can be merged after review by the legal sub-team. I am also attaching a PDF version of the document for your convenience. Best regards, <CCWGLegalquestions.pdf> León _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
participants (11)
-
Adam Peake -
Dr Eberhard Lisse -
Dr Eberhard W Lisse
-
Jordan Carter -
Kavouss Arasteh -
León Felipe Sánchez Ambía -
McAuley, David -
Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva -
Robin Gross -
Roelof Meijer -
Samantha Eisner