Thanks James.  Great seeing you and everyone else this past week.  

Just an FYI for those not participating in WS2-Jurisdiction, this ICANNxit idea has been pushed very hard by Parminder and others on the list.  As we all know, the accountability reforms of WS1 are all predicated on California law, so this idea seems outside of the scope of WS2 since WS2 wasn't meant to dismantle WS1.  Further complicating things, there is now a crowd in WS2-Jurisdiction pushing for the idea that ICANN should be "immune" from the courts; essentially the opposite of accountability.  

Now for the commentary:  I hope that if either of these bad ideas make their way into the final reports (however unlikely that such would occur), that the GNSO at least would stand in the way of adoption -- even if such a stand were against the tide of ICANN orthodoxy prevalent at the moment of voting.


Best,
Paul


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] FW: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: ICANN's US jurisdiction
From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@godaddy.com>
Date: Wed, November 09, 2016 3:08 am
To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org>

Council colleagues –
 
See below for a statement published on the CCWG-ACCT mailing list.
Thank you,
J.
 
From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of parminder <parminder@itforchange.net>
Date: Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 7:31
To: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community@icann.org>
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: ICANN's US jurisdiction
 
All
I thought this may be relevant to those on this list. Regard, parminder


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:
ICANN's US jurisdiction
Date:
Wed, 9 Nov 2016 07:23:40 +0530
From:
parminder <parminder@itforchange.net>
To:
governance@lists.igcaucus.org <governance@lists.igcaucus.org>, BestBitsList <bestbits@lists.bestbits.net>, Forum@Justnetcoalition. Org <forum@justnetcoalition.org>


All

As you know, the issue of jurisdiction of ICANN is under consideration at ICANN's community process (in the accountability track where there is a sub group discussing this issue). ICANN is currently meeting in Hyderabad, India, from 3rd to 9th November.

Today, on the last day of ICANN's Hyderabad meeting, the enclosed statement was issued by key Indian civil society organisations engaged with Internet governance issues, supported by two key global networks involved in this area. The statement expresses the urgent need for transiting ICANN from being under the jurisdiction of one country, presenting the rationale of why this is important to do. It also lists some possible options of doing so, towards beginning a serious action-oriented deliberation on this very important matter. Unlike what is often understood, the jurisdiction issue is not just a matter of sovereign prestige and self respect of the states but concerns vital matters impacting people's rights. This is especially so as the society gets more and more digitised in all areas.

We welcome comments and feedback.

The statement has been issued by the following Indian civil society organisations.
Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore
IT for Change, Bangalore
Free Software Movement of India, Hyderabad
Society for Knowledge Commons, New Delhi
Digital Empowerment Foundation, New Delhi
Delhi Science Forum, New Delhi
Software Freedom Law Center India, New Delhi
Third World Network - India, New Delhi
 
It is supported by the following global networks:
Association For Progressive Communications
Just Net Coalition

We will soon expand this effort to enlist more global support.
Best, Parminder