Notes, recordings, transcript for WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #2_8 September 2016
Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #2 - 8 September 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/YhKsAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Notes Welcome/Admin Tatiana Tropina audio only for the moment. No changes to SOIs. Document: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61608546&preview=/6... * Meeting Time Rotation Greg Shatan: will rotate between 1300 and 1900 slots leaving aside the 0500. May vary days of the week but will avoid 1900 on Friday. Kavouss Arasteh: could we shift 1900 to 2000? Bernard Turcotte: Schedule will be reviewed with change to daylight savings later in the fall. * Work Plan and Schedule Overview (attached). Looking to have a deliverable complete in February 2017. https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=61608546&preview=/6... Greg Shatan: This work plan assumes we are a Complex project. Presentation of the slide. Milton Mueller: this schedule seems unrealistic to me. We take 2.5 months to develop a work plan and don't talk substance until December, then we complete our "deliverable" in only one month? David McAuley: We may be able to get into substance by asking participants to contribute to a gap analysis between the accountability framework that is being implemented vs its applicability vs jurisdictions. Greg Shatan: Need a rolling list of action items. The first item should be this gap analysis. Farzaneh Badii: Greg as to gap analysis you say in the doc that: I think there was a general conclusion that ICANN's current jurisdiction didn't result in any significant "gaps" relating to ICANN accountability. Whether there is a formal "gap analysis" is another question, and one we need to explore. David McAuley: Do not remember any formal gap analysis from WS1. This is about the settlement of disputes jursidiction. Kavouss Arasteh: there was no formal conclusion in WS1 that there was no gap. Kavouss Arasteh: was NOTa general conclusion that ICANN's current jurisdiction didn't result in any significant "gaps" relating to ICANN accountability. Whether there is a formal "gap analysis" is another question, and one we need to explore. Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): We had very general discussions - that is what we did... Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): anyway what is on the ws1 final papers is what represents our agreements... David McAuley: agree w/Kavouss re gap - we have to check * Plan to Develop Detailed Work Plan & Schedule * Plan for September/October (see attached) * Suggestions for overall Work Plan * Our Goal is a Deliverable * Discussion of Scope * Do we begin with Scope? * Jordan Carter lightning talk suggested being "upfront about our interests" * Detailed Reading of Google Doc (Staff Paper, as revised and annotated by Members of Subgroup) Kavouss Arasteh: Not in favor of Applicable Law? Greg Shatan: no issue since it is in Annex 12. David McAuley: disputes should include legal actions vs ICANN in various jurisdictions? Milton Mueller: so jurisdictional effects on two distinct things: 1) accountability mechanisms; 2) actual operation of policies (whatever that means) And by 2) we are referring primarily to dispute resolution jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): At the same time we said that this refers "primarily" to 1) settlement of disputes, including choice of jurisdiction and applicable laws, what disputes "within ICANN" means could also be useful. Greg Shatan: Within ICANN implies actors within ICANN but it would seem undluly restrictive to say this only includes ICANN's internal dispute resolution processes. jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): within ICANN I guess covers all parties affected by ICANN decisions and which may bring an internal claim against it. Kavouss Arasteh: why NOT NECESSARILY? David McAuley: From WS1 recollection the NECESSARILY comes in if the gap analysis notes that the accountability mechanisms are broken (material problem) because of jurisdiction. Edward Morris: My recollection is the same as David's David McAuley: Thanks Kavouss, and I think that is part of our task. Good question you asked. Milton Mueller: I think many of these points could be best pursued on the list, in writing David McAuley: +1 Milton Avri Doria: so ICANN is only incorporated in one place and these lesser 'registrations' do not affect jurisdiction? Registrations and their relation to incorporation are essentially different with respect to jurisdictional obligations? Is so where are jurisdictional issues related to multiple registrations dealt with? Vinay Kesari: Agree with Paul. I think ICANN has gone on record stating specifically that local offices are subject to local laws on issues such as employment. Kavouss Arasteh: best to use both email list and Google doc. As to this question is it not too detailed at this time? Avri Doria: what is the status of the ICANN presence in non-US jurisdiction? Greg Shatan: Action Item - this should be answered by ICANN legal. Samantha Eisner: We have to adhere to laws that allow us to have offices in different locations but I can confirm that we have not incorporated in any other location Samantha Eisner: ICANN typically is a "branch" location or a registered foreign office equivalent Jeff Neuman: I would like to know the difference between "Engagement Centers", "HUBs", "Offices", etc/ Avri Doria: Not incorporated? Also not registered as some sort of company? Jeff Neuman: Is there a way to get those definitions from ICANN staff? Jeff Neuman: I have to admit I never understood Fadi's distinctions Samantha Eisner: Yes, Jeff Greg Shatan: Will start the next version of the google doc and circulate. Vinay Kesari: Hi Avri, many countries (India for example) allow a foreign company to set up a representative/ branch office locally. This is not a separate legal entity, can't sue/ be sued. But it requires a registration * Creation of Scope Document? * Other Potential Inputs to our Work * More Detailed Review of Lightning Talks * Pertinent Literature (influenced by Scope) * Experts/Legal Advice * AOB * Adjourn Greg Shatan: Adjourned
Dear All, The statement made or the trasncript made on my behalf is WRONG I THEREFORE CORRECT THAT Kavouss Arasteh: is in favor of Applicable Law 2016-09-10 10:50 GMT+02:00 MSSI Secretariat <mssi-secretariat@icann.org>:
Hello all,
The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 *Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #2* – 8 September 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/YhKsAw
A copy of the notes may be found below.
Thank you.
With kind regards,
Brenda Brewer
MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant
ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
*Notes*
Welcome/Admin
Tatiana Tropina audio only for the moment.
No changes to SOIs.
Document: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage. action?pageId=61608546&preview=/61608546/61611662/ CopyofWS2JurisdictionStaffIssuesPaper.pdf
• Meeting Time Rotation
Greg Shatan: will rotate between 1300 and 1900 slots leaving aside the 0500. May vary days of the week but will avoid 1900 on Friday.
Kavouss Arasteh: could we shift 1900 to 2000?
Bernard Turcotte: Schedule will be reviewed with change to daylight savings later in the fall.
• Work Plan and Schedule Overview (attached). Looking to have a deliverable complete in February 2017.
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId= 61608546&preview=/61608546/61611660/Jurisdiction% 20Agenda%20and%20Overview%20for%20Meeting%202.pdf
Greg Shatan: This work plan assumes we are a Complex project. Presentation of the slide.
*Milton Mueller: *this schedule seems unrealistic to me. We take 2.5 months to develop a work plan and don't talk substance until December, then we complete our "deliverable" in only one month?
David McAuley: We may be able to get into substance by asking participants to contribute to a gap analysis between the accountability framework that is being implemented vs its applicability vs jurisdictions.
Greg Shatan: Need a rolling list of action items. The first item should be this gap analysis.
*Farzaneh Badii: *Greg as to gap analysis you say in the doc that: I think there was a general conclusion that ICANN' s current jurisdiction didn't result in any significant "gaps" relating to ICANN accountability. Whether there is a formal "gap analysis" is another question, and one we need to explore.
David McAuley: Do not remember any formal gap analysis from WS1. This is about the settlement of disputes jursidiction.
Kavouss Arasteh: there was no formal conclusion in WS1 that there was no gap.
*Kavouss Arasteh: * was NOTa general conclusion that ICANN' s current jurisdiction didn't result in any significant " gaps" relating to ICANN accountability. Whether there is a formal "gap analysis" is another question, and one we need to explore.
*Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): *We had very general discussions - that is what we did...
*Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): *anyway what is on the ws1 final papers is what represents our agreements...
*David McAuley: *agree w/Kavouss re gap - we have to check
• Plan to Develop Detailed Work Plan & Schedule
• Plan for September/October (see attached)
• Suggestions for overall Work Plan
• Our Goal is a Deliverable
• Discussion of Scope
• Do we begin with Scope?
• Jordan Carter lightning talk suggested being “upfront about our interests”
• Detailed Reading of Google Doc (Staff Paper, as revised and annotated by Members of Subgroup)
Kavouss Arasteh: Not in favor of Applicable Law?
Greg Shatan: no issue since it is in Annex 12.
David McAuley: disputes should include legal actions vs ICANN in various jurisdictions?
*Milton Mueller: *so jurisdictional effects on two distinct things: 1) accountability mechanisms; 2) actual operation of policies ( whatever that means) And by 2) we are referring primarily to dispute resolution
*jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): *At the same time we said that this refers "primarily" to 1) settlement of disputes, including choice of jurisdiction and applicable laws, what disputes "within ICANN" means could also be useful.
Greg Shatan: Within ICANN implies actors within ICANN but it would seem undluly restrictive to say this only includes ICANN's internal dispute resolution processes.
*jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): *within ICANN I guess covers all parties affected by ICANN decisions and which may bring an internal claim against it.
Kavouss Arasteh: why NOT NECESSARILY?
David McAuley: From WS1 recollection the NECESSARILY comes in if the gap analysis notes that the accountability mechanisms are broken (material problem) because of jurisdiction.
*Edward Morris: *My recollection is the same as David's
*David McAuley: *Thanks Kavouss, and I think that is part of our task. Good question you asked.
*Milton Mueller: *I think many of these points could be best pursued on the list, in writing
*David McAuley: *+1 Milton
*Avri Doria: *so ICANN is only incorporated in one place and these lesser 'registrations' do not affect jurisdiction? Registrations and their relation to incorporation are essentially different with respect to jurisdictional obligations? Is so where are jurisdictional issues related to multiple registrations dealt with?
*Vinay Kesari: *Agree with Paul. I think ICANN has gone on record stating specifically that local offices are subject to local laws on issues such as employment.
Kavouss Arasteh: best to use both email list and Google doc. As to this question is it not too detailed at this time?
Avri Doria: what is the status of the ICANN presence in non-US jurisdiction?
Greg Shatan: Action Item - this should be answered by ICANN legal.
*Samantha Eisner: *We have to adhere to laws that allow us to have offices in different locations but I can confirm that we have not incorporated in any other location
*Samantha Eisner: *ICANN typically is a "branch" location or a registered foreign office equivalent
*Jeff Neuman: *I would like to know the difference between " Engagement Centers", "HUBs", "Offices", etc/
*Avri Doria:* Not incorporated? Also not registered as some sort of company?
*Jeff Neuman: *Is there a way to get those definitions from ICANN staff?
*Jeff Neuman: *I have to admit I never understood Fadi's distinctions
*Samantha Eisner:* Yes, Jeff
Greg Shatan: Will start the next version of the google doc and circulate.
*Vinay Kesari: *Hi Avri, many countries (India for example) allow a foreign company to set up a representative/ branch office locally. This is not a separate legal entity, can't sue/ be sued. But it requires a registration
• Creation of Scope Document?
• Other Potential Inputs to our Work
• More Detailed Review of Lightning Talks
• Pertinent Literature (influenced by Scope)
• Experts/Legal Advice
• AOB
• Adjourn
Greg Shatan: Adjourned
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Kavous, I believe what is should say is that you were asking Greg if HE was in favour of Applicable Law. Will ensure this is amended. Cheers. B. On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All, The statement made or the trasncript made on my behalf is WRONG I THEREFORE CORRECT THAT Kavouss Arasteh: is in favor of Applicable Law
2016-09-10 10:50 GMT+02:00 MSSI Secretariat <mssi-secretariat@icann.org>:
Hello all,
The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 *Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #2* – 8 September 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/YhKsAw
A copy of the notes may be found below.
Thank you.
With kind regards,
Brenda Brewer
MSSI Projects & Operations Assistant
ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
*Notes*
Welcome/Admin
Tatiana Tropina audio only for the moment.
No changes to SOIs.
Document: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action? pageId=61608546&preview=/61608546/61611662/CopyofWS2Jur isdictionStaffIssuesPaper.pdf
• Meeting Time Rotation
Greg Shatan: will rotate between 1300 and 1900 slots leaving aside the 0500. May vary days of the week but will avoid 1900 on Friday.
Kavouss Arasteh: could we shift 1900 to 2000?
Bernard Turcotte: Schedule will be reviewed with change to daylight savings later in the fall.
• Work Plan and Schedule Overview (attached). Looking to have a deliverable complete in February 2017.
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=616 08546&preview=/61608546/61611660/Jurisdiction%20Agenda% 20and%20Overview%20for%20Meeting%202.pdf
Greg Shatan: This work plan assumes we are a Complex project . Presentation of the slide.
*Milton Mueller: *this schedule seems unrealistic to me. We ta ke 2.5 months to develop a work plan and don't talk substanc e until December, then we complete our "deliverable" in only one month?
David McAuley: We may be able to get into substance by askin g participants to contribute to a gap analysis between the accountability framework that is being implemented vs its ap plicability vs jurisdictions.
Greg Shatan: Need a rolling list of action items. The first item should be this gap analysis.
*Farzaneh Badii: *Greg as to gap analysis you say in the doc that: I think there was a general conclusion that ICANN's current jurisdiction didn't result in any significant "gaps" relating to ICANN accountability. Whether there is a formal "gap analysis" is another question, and one we need to explore.
David McAuley: Do not remember any formal gap analysis from WS1. This is about the settlement of disputes jursidiction.
Kavouss Arasteh: there was no formal conclusion in WS1 that there wa s no gap.
*Kavouss Arasteh: * was NOTa general conclusion that ICANN's current jurisdiction didn't result in any significant "gaps " relating to ICANN accountability. Whether there is a formal "gap analysis" is another question, and one we need to explore.
*Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): *We had very general discussions - that is what we did...
*Jorge Cancio (GAC Switzerland): *anyway what is on the ws1 final pa pers is what represents our agreements...
*David McAuley: *agree w/Kavouss re gap - we have to check
• Plan to Develop Detailed Work Plan & Schedule
• Plan for September/October (see attached)
• Suggestions for overall Work Plan
• Our Goal is a Deliverable
• Discussion of Scope
• Do we begin with Scope?
• Jordan Carter lightning talk suggested being “upfront about our interests”
• Detailed Reading of Google Doc (Staff Paper, as revised and annotated by Members of Subgroup)
Kavouss Arasteh: Not in favor of Applicable Law?
Greg Shatan: no issue since it is in Annex 12.
David McAuley: disputes should include legal actions vs ICANN in various jurisdictions?
*Milton Mueller: *so jurisdictional effects on two distinct things: 1) accountability mechanisms; 2) actual operation of policies (whatever that means) And by 2) we are referring primarily to dispute resolution
*jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): *At the same time we said tha t this refers "primarily" to 1) settlement of disputes, inc luding choice of jurisdiction and applicable laws, what disputes "within ICANN" means could also be useful.
Greg Shatan: Within ICANN implies actors within IC ANN but it would seem undluly restrictive to say this only includes ICANN's internal dispute resolution processes.
*jorge cancio (GAC Switzerland): *within ICANN I guess covers all parties affected by ICANN decisions and which may bring an internal claim against it.
Kavouss Arasteh: why NOT NECESSARILY?
David McAuley: From WS1 recollection the NECESSARILY comes in if the gap analysis notes that the accountability mechan isms are broken (material problem) because of jurisdiction.
*Edward Morris: *My recollection is the same as David's
*David McAuley: *Thanks Kavouss, and I think that is part of o ur task. Good question you asked.
*Milton Mueller: *I think many of these points could be best p ursued on the list, in writing
*David McAuley: *+1 Milton
*Avri Doria: *so ICANN is only incorporated in one place and t hese lesser 'registrations' do not affect jurisdiction? Registrations and their relation to incorporation are essent ially different with respect to jurisdictional obligations? Is so where are jurisdictional issues related to multiple registrations dealt with?
*Vinay Kesari: *Agree with Paul. I think ICANN has gone on rec ord stating specifically that local offices are subject to local laws on issues such as employment.
Kavouss Arasteh: best to use both email list and Google doc. As to this question is it not too detailed at this time?
Avri Doria: what is the status of the ICANN presence in non- US jurisdiction?
Greg Shatan: Action Item - this should be answered by ICANN legal.
*Samantha Eisner: *We have to adhere to laws that allow us to have offices in different locations but I can confirm that we have not incorporated in any other location
*Samantha Eisner: *ICANN typically is a "branch" location or a registered foreign office equivalent
*Jeff Neuman: *I would like to know the difference between "En gagement Centers", "HUBs", "Offices", etc/
*Avri Doria:* Not incorporated? Also not registered as some so rt of company?
*Jeff Neuman: *Is there a way to get those definitions from ICANN staff?
*Jeff Neuman: *I have to admit I never understood Fadi's distinctions
*Samantha Eisner:* Yes, Jeff
Greg Shatan: Will start the next version of the google doc and circulate.
*Vinay Kesari: *Hi Avri, many countries (India for example) al low a foreign company to set up a representative/ branch office locally. This is not a separat e legal entity, can't sue/ be sued. But it requires a registration
• Creation of Scope Document?
• Other Potential Inputs to our Work
• More Detailed Review of Lightning Talks
• Pertinent Literature (influenced by Scope)
• Experts/Legal Advice
• AOB
• Adjourn
Greg Shatan: Adjourned
_______________________________________________ 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
participants (3)
-
Bernard Turcotte -
Kavouss Arasteh -
MSSI Secretariat