Dear Greg, dear all As mentioned in the chat at the last meeting I am sending suggested changes to the report in order to take into account the comments made by Denmark. The purpose is – if more choices of law in the RA and RAA and also choices of Venue in the RA are made available – that it then should be up to Registries and Registrars to decide the applicable law and venue. It should not be part of the negotiation when entering into a contract with ICANN. 1) Page 20, last line: Delete “(or at least to negotiate for)”. 2) Page 21, 1st paragraph: Replace ”The method of “choosing” from the menu also needs to be considered. The registry could simply be able to make a choice from the menu, or it could be part of the registry’s negotiations with ICANN.” with “The method of “choosing” from the menu also needs to be considered. The Sub-group recommends that it should be up to the registry to choose from the menu. It should not be part of the registry’s negotiations with ICANN.” 3) Page 25: Add the following sentence after the last bullet point in the section with the title “Choice of law in Registry Agreements”: “If a menu approach is implemented then it should be up the Registry to choose from the menu.” I hope the above suggestions are helpful. Best, Finn Fra: Ws2-jurisdiction [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] På vegne af Greg Shatan Sendt: 31. januar 2018 06:14 Til: ws2-jurisdiction Emne: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Copy of Jurisdiction Subgroup Draft Report for Suggested Revisions All. There is a working copy of the Jurisdiction Subgroup's report as it was put out for public comment in Google Docs at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H-8AKrebLqPFHNCyUavzgJXxMkNnxo28zhG1CYdN.... Any proposed revisions to the report based on the public comments will be added to this document. For your convenience, I have attached Word and PDF copies of the report to this email. I look forward to our call. Best regards, Greg