On Wednesday 11 October 2017 03:40 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:

All,

I have received no comments on the Draft Subgroup Report.

Greg, I was able to see it only just now and have the following quick comments before today's meeting. Will give more comments later on

At 2 places the report notes that the sub group got into discussing to topic of of "changing ICANN’s headquarters or jurisdiction of incorporation".

As I have previously mentioned on this list, I recall no real discussion at any time on actually "changing ICANN's headquarters or jurisdiction of incorporation". What did happen were repeated discussions on possibility of seeking immunity for ICANN under the US's International Organisations Immunity Act... Why dont we mention the actual discussion that took place in the group -- however inadequately, despite many members repeated requests for a proper discussion -- then put in what was hardly discussed?

Next, the report says that it chose to priortize the two issues of OFAC and choice of jurisdiction in contracts among many possible issues. I just want to be reminded which decision it refers to, and taken when. In any case, I disassociate myself from any such decision. But please do point me to the relevant decision of the sub group.

I am also not clear about

"The Subgroup understands that it cannot require ICANN to make amendments to the RA or the RAA " (said with regard to choice of jurisdiction recs)..... Why so? Sorry if this has already been discussed, but fell be grateful if the reason is explained to me.

I do also note that there is really no recommendation with regard to choice of jurisdiction issue but just a series of musings. This fact that no rec is being made in this regard should be very clearly stated.

So, finally the only substantial thing I understand the group to be saying is that it wants ICANN to be more specifically clear that it will try to seek OFAC licence for all otherwise legitimate cases, and that ICANN should explore (only explore) general OFAC licences -- which rec is also made with too much defensiveness.

And it wants to say nothing on jurisdictional immunity issue, in fact completely censor the issue out of the report, even in parts which just factually deal with discussions that happened in the group.

More later,

thanks, parminder

PS: Excuse me for the hurried comments, I am at some place right now where I am very constrained in time.

I have added a summary of the Choice of Law and Choice of Venue Recommendation to the Executive Summary, based on the current state of that Recommendation in the Google doc.

The Draft Report is attached in Word and PDF versions. The Google doc is (still) at https://docs.google.com/document/d/135c03wFSIlz1Lqdv6Tte8sw7tMinsQEgy0CoNtRXT4Y/edit?usp=sharing

I will circulate that Recommendation next, in Word and PDF versions, as it now stands.

These documents will be discussed on tomorrow's call. An agenda will be circulated shortly.

Greg
_______________________________________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction