September 2017 - Ws2-jurisdiction

Recordings, DAIRs, Raw Caption Notes for Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #47 | 18 September 2017
by MSSI Secretariat Sept. 19, 2017

Sept. 19, 2017

Hello all, You may find the recordings, Decisions, Action Items, Requests (DAIRs), and raw caption notes for CCWG Accountability WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #47 – 18 September 2017 posted at: https://community.icann.org/x/fyUhB The transcript will be posted on when it becomes available (usually in 3 to 5 business days after the call). A copy of the DAIRs and raw caption notes may be found below. Thank you. Kind Regards, Yvette Guigneaux (MSSI) Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives Projects & Operations Assistant. ICANN – Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Email: yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org Cell: +1-310-460-8432 Skype: yvette.guigneaux.icann www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/> [cid:image002.png@01D330A1.E75DABE0] ________________________________ Action Items: · GS to produce iterative drafts of the OFAC recommendation until 20 September deadline for submission of documents for the 27 September plenary. Raw Captioning Notes Disclaimer: This rough edit transcript, which may contain missing, misspelled or paraphrased words, is only provided for your immediate review and is not certified as verbatim and is not to be cited in any way. * Word Doc<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69281151/CCWG-Accountabili…> * PDF<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69281151/CCWG-Accountabili…> Decisions: * The sub-group will try to provide a draft of the OFAC recommendation for consideration by the plenary at its 27 September call. Requests: · (none) Documents Presented OFAC Recommendation as of 09182017.pdf<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69281151/OFAC%20Recommenda…>

1 0

Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] RES: mandate re ccTLD issues
by Jordan Carter Sept. 18, 2017

Sept. 18, 2017

Dear all, dear Kavouss Thank you for your email. The PDP I am referring to is that set out in the ICANN bylaws for the ccNSO: <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#annexB> I have tried to be as clear as I can be on the process question. The policy regarding delegations of ccTLD managers is in RFCs and has most recently been understood through the lens of Framework of Interpretation, a joint effort between the ccNSO and the GAC (see https://features.icann.org/adoption-framework-interpretation-cctld-delegati… for 2015 Board adoption of the report). Arising from that work the ccNSO has commenced a PDP dealing with the first of two issues, that being how to deal with the retirement of a ccTLD. There is another PDP to come, on how to resolve disputes regarding the delegation, revocation and retirement of ccTLDs. It seems to me that the example you raise below is one that would give rise to a dispute, and it is the mechanism to resolve such disputes that is not clear today. That's why the ccNSO will conduct a PDP to make it clear. My interventions have aimed only to remind everyone in this group that the CCWG can't make policy on this subject. It has no authority or scope to do so, because policy on these ccTLD subjects is the responsibility of the ccNSO. My purpose in offering that reminder is so that all of the participants in the group can choose where to focus their discussion. There might be other matters where the group can make recommendations with more impact. The group might think that offering views on those is more important. Or, it might think that offering views for the ccNSO to consider is more important. I haven't got a view either way - the ccNSO's sole responsibility for making policy on ccTLD matters isn't in doubt. I just want to make sure that everyone is clear about what this group can do, and on the specific point of ccTLD policy, what it cannot do. I have no view about the GNSO. I am not suggesting this group or the CCWG "consult" the ccNSO per se. Even if the ccNSO could respond with an opinion about jurisdiction matters, that would still be of no use to the CCWG in making recommendations. Any recommendations that dealt with ccTLD policy would lead to the CCWG's recommendations on the subject being unable to be adopted by the ICANN Board. Since this is only one very narrow matter in the wide range of jurisdiction-related topics, I am sure there is no need to close this group or deny Greg the right to keep doing the hard work he is doing to be the rapporteur in this interesting and vital area. All best regards, Jordan On 18 September 2017 at 02:47, Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Jordan > I am not sure what type of PDP you suggest for unilateral decision of > American court for delegation or transfer of .ir to third party . > We wish to limit such type of order as well as the potential influence of > US government or any other government to interfere with the ccTLD of any > other country based on founded or non founded claims > If neither ICANN not any other entity is authorised to intervene or > interfere with ccTLD of any country or any geographic territory that > equally applies to US government, US court and say other government and its > court > Fortunately New Zealand or U.K. ccTLD were not yet subject to such > interference > Pls kindly clarify your position . In other word are you supporting such > interference or opposing to that > Reply to Milton > If you believe that the sub group should consult GNSO and Jordan and Nigel > believe that the subgroup should consult ccNSO to address such disturbing > unilateral influence of US government and its court and any other > government and its court then we need to close the shop of Grec and stop > all discussions > Regards > Kavouss > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 15 Sep 2017, at 22:25, Mueller, Milton L <milton(a)gatech.edu> wrote: > > The most that the CCWG would have the scope and competence to do with any > such recommendation would be to make it as a suggestion to the ccNSO to > consider. Neither the Board nor any other party can require the ccNSO to > conduct a PDP, and without such a PDP, no policy affecting ccTLD matters > can be made. > > > > That’s fine. The same is true of the GNSO and the ASO for that matter. > This subgroup identifies problems and recommends solutions. > It’s up to others to develop policies to implement the solutions. > > > > Dr. Milton Mueller > > Professor, School of Public Policy > > Georgia Institute of Technology > > > > <image002.jpg> <http://www.internetgovernance.org/> > > _______________________________________________ > Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list > Ws2-jurisdiction(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction > > -- *Jordan Carter* Chief Executive InternetNZ Office: +64 4 495 2118 <04-495%202118> | Mobile: +64 21 442 649 <021%20442%20649> | Skype: jordancarter Email: jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz <https://2017.nethui.nz/>

4 3

Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] [Ext] Re: Agenda for Upcoming Jurisdiction Meeting
by Kavouss Arasteh Sept. 18, 2017

Sept. 18, 2017

Dear Greg, Further to my previous message, I have further reflected to the text that you posted and made the following edits as attached. This is important to include these edits tonight Regards Kavouss On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Greg > Thanks > I got it from MSSI > I made some Monir edits as sent to you . > I have the following comments / questions > Actions being suggested are partial and thus insufficient. > They do not adequately address the problems > We wee reluctantly agreed not to insist on venue nor applicable law > provided that the OFAC restrictions unilaterally imposed by one government > be waived. Consequently we are not comfortable with the RECOMMENDATION > Regards > Kavouss > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 18 Sep 2017, at 10:55, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Kavouss, > > I circulated the latest version of the OFAC Recommendation to the list a > little over an hour ago, reflecting the discussion from our reading of the > Recommendation on last week's call. You should have already seen it. For > your convenience, I attach it again. Here is the text of the email > transmitting the revised version of the OFAC Recommendation: > > All, > > Attached are copies of the OFAC recommendation, revised to reflect the > issues raised and the results of discussions during the reading of the > recommendation on last week's call. The Google Doc has been revised > following that reading, and Word and PDF copies reflecting these revisions > are attached. > > Please review this version prior to the call. I would like to suggest > that the upcoming call be considered the "second reading" of the > Recommendation, and the Recommendation be left open for 48 hours afterwards > for comments from those unable to attend the call. > > I look forward to our call. > > Best regards, > > Greg > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Kavouss Arasteh < > kavouss.arasteh(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear Yvette >> Thank you very much for your swift reply. >> Pls kindly send me the document (OFAC REC,)as being read for the first >> reading >> Regards >> Kavouss >> >> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 8:42 AM, MSSI Secretariat < >> mssi-secretariat(a)icann.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi Kavouss – Good day, hope all is well with you. Your dial out number >>> requested below is noted and will be used for the Jurisdiction call. Please >>> note we will dial out 10 minutes ahead of the call to make sure the hotel >>> can connect the call properly, thank you. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> >>> *Yvette Guigneaux* >>> >>> *(MSSI) Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives * >>> >>> Projects & Operations Assistant. >>> >>> >>> >>> *ICANN – Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers* >>> >>> Email: yvette.guigneaux(a)icann.org >>> >>> Cell: +1-310-460-8432 <(310)%20460-8432> >>> >>> Skype: yvette.guigneaux.icann >>> >>> www.icann.org >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] >>> *Sent:* Sunday, September 17, 2017 11:21 PM >>> *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com>; Bernard Turcotte < >>> turcotte.bernard(a)gmail.com>; MSSI Secretariat < >>> mssi-secretariat(a)icann.org> >>> *Subject:* [Ext] Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Agenda for Upcoming >>> Jurisdiction Meeting >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> 1. Pls kindly note as of today I am in Abu Dhabi ( VICEROY Yas Island ) >>> till 29 September. >>> >>> Unless informed to the contray ,I can be reached at +971 2656 0000 Room >>> 1505. >>> >>> 2. Please kindly forward me with the text of OFAC Rec. which you >>> declared being read ( First Reading)as I can not find it on Google Doc. ( I >>> have had difficulties to search Google DOC. ) Regards >>> >>> Kavouss >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> All, >>> >>> >>> >>> The agenda for our upcoming meeting is attached. Documents will be >>> circulated soon. Google docs will be recirculated shortly before the >>> meeting, so that any late changes can be captured. >>> >>> >>> >>> I look forward to our call. >>> >>> >>> >>> Greg >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list >>> Ws2-jurisdiction(a)icann.org >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction >>> >>> >>> >> >> > <OFAC Recommendation 09172017.docx> > > <OFAC Recommendation 09172017.pdf> > >

1 0

OFAC Recommendation
by Greg Shatan Sept. 18, 2017

Sept. 18, 2017

All, Attached are copies of the OFAC recommendation, revised to reflect the issues raised and the results of discussions during the reading of the recommendation on last week's call. The Google Doc has been revised following that reading, and Word and PDF copies reflecting these revisions are attached. Please review this version prior to the call. I would like to suggest that the upcoming call be considered the "second reading" of the Recommendation, and the Recommendation be left open for 48 hours afterwards for comments from those unable to attend the call. I look forward to our call. Greg

2 1

Agenda for Upcoming Jurisdiction Meeting
by Greg Shatan Sept. 18, 2017

Sept. 18, 2017

All, The agenda for our upcoming meeting is attached. Documents will be circulated soon. Google docs will be recirculated shortly before the meeting, so that any late changes can be captured. I look forward to our call. Greg

1 0

mandate re ccTLD issues
by Thomas Rickert Sept. 17, 2017

Sept. 17, 2017

Dear all, there has been quite some discussion about whether or not ccTLD delegations and redelegations (Nigel, I know it is technically not a relegation :-)) should be worked on as issues for the jurisdiction sub team. This is a particularly sensitive issue for different reasons. Not all ccTLD operators are part of the ccNSO and therefore ICANN, let alone our group,and we cannot establish rules for disputes that affect those ccTLDs. Further, when we worked on the “judiciary building block“ in our accountability system, we explicitly limited our work to issues not related to ccTLD (re)delegations. Therefore, we made it part of our recommendations that the ccNSO would develop a policy for this.. ccNSO representatives have made it abundantly clear that we must not step over this line and try to impose on them. We could check with the ccNSO leadership, but given the discussions at the time I strongly believe that the ccNSO’s support for WS1 recommendations was based on this very demarcation in our recommendations. In addition to that, one of our main principles for WS2 is not to undo work that has been done in WS1. Working on (re)delegation issues for ccTLDs would violate that rule. I hope this helps. Best, Thomas

8 12

Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] RES: mandate re ccTLD issues
by Alan Greenberg Sept. 15, 2017

Sept. 15, 2017

Although not important to this discussion, the Board does have the authority to initiate a GNSO PDP. Alan At 15/09/2017 04:25 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote: > >>The most that the CCWG would have the scope and competence to do >>with any such recommendation would be to make it as a suggestion to >>the ccNSO to consider. Neither the Board nor any other party can >>require the ccNSO to conduct a PDP, and without such a PDP, no >>policy affecting ccTLD matters can be made. >That's fine. The same is true of the GNSO and the ASO for that >matter. This subgroup identifies problems and recommends solutions. >It's up to others to develop policies to implement the solutions. > >Dr. Milton Mueller >Professor, School of Public Policy >Georgia Institute of Technology

1 0

Recordings, DAIRs, Raw Caption Notes for Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #46 | 13 September 2017
by Brenda Brewer Sept. 13, 2017

Sept. 13, 2017

Hello all, You may find the recordings, Decisions, Action Items, Requests (DAIRs), and raw caption notes for CCWG Accountability WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #46 – 13 September 2017 posted at https://community.icann.org/x/eiUhB. The transcript will be posted on when it becomes available (usually in 3 to 5 business days after the call). A copy of the DAIRs and raw caption notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) [cid:image001.png@01D32C96.8858E4C0] Action Items: * GS to develop a plan going forward for the next few remaining calls and publish this on the list this week. Raw Captioning Notes Disclaimer: This rough edit transcript, which may contain missing, misspelled or paraphrased words, is only provided for your immediate review and is not certified as verbatim and is not to be cited in any way. * Word Doc<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69281146/CCWG-Accountabili…> * PDF<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69281146/CCWG-Accountabili…> Decisions: * Continue with choice of law discussion at the start of the next meeting. Requests: * Participants to review OFAC recommendation and comment on list. Documents Presented * OFAC Recommendation First Draft<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69281146/OFAC%2BRecommenda…> * Master List of Proposed Issues Submitted by Subgroup<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/69281146/Master%20List%20o…>

1 0

Additional Documents for Upcoming Meeting
by Greg Shatan Sept. 13, 2017

Sept. 13, 2017

All, I attach the following additional documents 1. Proposed Issue: Choice of Law in Registry Agreements. This simply contains the emails from Raphael and Jorge setting out this proposed issue. There has been substantial discussion of these on the list. 2. Background: Amending the Registry Agreement This is an excerpt from the ICANN website, which was posted in connection with the latest Global Amendment to the New gTLD Registry Agreement. Greg

1 0

Agenda and Documents for upcoming Jurisdiction Meeting
by Greg Shatan Sept. 12, 2017

Sept. 12, 2017

All, Here is the agenda and the latest version of the OFAC Recommendation, along with the Master List of Proposed issues. If there are more changes to these documents before the call, I will pull them down and recirculate prior to the call. I look forward to our call. Greg

1 0