+1 On 23-Nov-16 14:31, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
I think we want the broadest range of experiences, but of course would not consider hearsay. If anyone can point us to documents about anyone else's experiences, then what is the harm in considering those documents? To me, the worse risk is that we don't hear about them at all because the person who had the experience does not see our survey.
Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 http://rodenbaugh.com
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote:
+1 Everyone has opinions and second hand information. We want primary sources on t his …
P
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/>
My PGP Key: http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/ <http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/> __
*From:*ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Greg Shatan *Sent:* Wednesday, November 23, 2016 2:06 PM *To:* CW Mail <mail@christopherwilkinson.eu <mailto:mail@christopherwilkinson.eu>> *Cc:* ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] first draft of fact solicitation questions
I agree with CW on this one -- we are looking for first person facts, experiences and "anecdotal evidence." The facts are best known by the participants, and third parties (viewing events from the outside) often make assumptions about what happened or otherwise get things wrong.
Greg
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:04 PM, CW Mail <mail@christopherwilkinson.eu <mailto:mail@christopherwilkinson.eu>> wrote:
Mike: I might see the point of broadening, if possible, the scope and catchment of the questions, but perhaps not in that way.
We should be dealing with Principals (in the sense of directly with those responsible for the entities concerned). Not their surrogates or other third parties.
Otherwise we risk receiving second hand information with which the Principals may not agree, and inviting 'bulk' replies from interested organisations.
We should also be cautious about receiving anonymous hearsay.
Just a thought
CW
On 23 Nov 2016, at 17:20, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike@rodenbaugh.com>> wrote:
These seem well-stated, except perhaps they should not be looking only for personal experience, but broaden the request to seek any experience the responder is aware of? So I suggest something like:
1. Are you aware of any instance in which anyone's business, privacy, or ability to use or purchase DNS-related services, has been affected by ICANN's jurisdiction in any way?
If the answer is Yes, please describe specific cases or incidents, including the date, the parties involved, and links to any relevant documents.
2. Are you aware of any instance in which ICANN's jurisdiction affected any dispute resolution process or litigation related to domain names?
If the answer is Yes, please describe specific cases or incidents, including the date, the parties involved, and links to any relevant documents.
Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087 <tel:%2B1.415.738.8087>
http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/>
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu <mailto:milton@gatech.edu>> wrote:
CW and I have agreed on the following draft:
*Request for stakeholder input on jurisdiction issues*
The Jurisdiction subgroup of the CCWG Accountability is asking for the community to provide factual input on the following questions:
1. Has your business, your privacy or your ability to use or purchase DNS-related services, been affected by ICANN's jurisdiction in any way?
If the answer is Yes, please describe specific cases or incidents, including the date, the parties involved, and links to any relevant documents.
2. Has ICANN's jurisdiction affected any dispute resolution process or litigation related to domain names you have been involved in?
If the answer is Yes, please describe specific cases or incidents, including the date, the parties involved, and links to any relevant documents.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction>
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction>
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction>
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction>
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus