Noting further that this only applies to an in rem legal action brought “against a domain name in the judicial district in which the domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name authority that registered or assigned the domain name is located”. So it does not on its face apply to any ccTLD, and does not apply to any gTLD whose registry is located outside the US and where the registrant utilized a non-US registrar. I’m not sure if there is any case law on the meaning of “other domain name authority”, but it appears to be a catch-all phrase to pick up such entities as resellers that are not accredited registries and would not seem applicable to ICANN, which neither registers or assigns domains to registrants. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VlawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2017 6:31 PM To: Kavouss Arasteh Cc: ws2-jurisdiction Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Automatische Antwort: Mandate and Scope of Jurisdiction Subgroup will be on Tuesday's Agenda Kavouss, This relates only to the Anticybersquatting Protection Act, which may be found at: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1125. The specific language is in Section 1125(d)(2): (A)The owner of a mark may file an in rem civil action against a domain name in the judicial district in which the domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name authority that registered or assigned the domain name is located if— (i) the domain name violates any right of the owner of a mark registered in the Patent and Trademark Office, or protected under subsection (a) or (c); and (ii)the court finds that the owner— (I) is not able to obtain in personam jurisdiction over a person who would have been a defendant in a civil action under paragraph (1); or (II)through due diligence was not able to find a person who would have been a defendant in a civil action under paragraph (1) by— (aa) sending a notice of the alleged violation and intent to proceed under this paragraph to the registrant of the domain name at the postal and e-mail address provided by the registrant to the registrar; and (bb) publishing notice of the action as the court may direct promptly after filing the action. (B) The actions under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall constitute service of process. (C)In an in rem action under this paragraph, a domain name shall be deemed to have its situs in the judicial district in which— (i) the domain name registrar, registry, or other domain name authority that registered or assig ned the domain name is located; or (ii) documents sufficient to establish control and authority regarding the disposition of the registration and use of the domain name are deposited with the court. (D) (i)The remedies in an in rem action under this paragraph shall be limited to a court order for the forfeiture or cancellation of the domain name or the transfer of the domain name to the owner of the mark. Upon receipt of written notification of a filed, stamped copy of a complaint filed by the owner of a mark in a United States district court under this paragraph, the domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name authority shall— (I) expeditiously deposit with the court documents sufficient to establish the court’s control and authority regarding the disposition of the registration and use of the domain name to the court; and (II) not transfer, suspend, or otherwise modify the domain name during the pendency of the action, except upon order of the court. (ii) The domain name registrar or registry or other domain name authority shall not be liable for injunctive or monetary relief under this paragraph except in the case of bad faith or reckless disregard, which includes a willful failure to comply with any such court order. (3) The civil action established under paragraph (1) and the in rem action established under paragraph (2), and any remedy available under either such action, shall be in addition to any other civil action or remedy otherwise applicable. (4) The in rem jurisdiction established under paragraph (2) shall be in addition to any other jurisdiction that otherwise exists, whether in rem or in personam. On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> wrote: "In one of your earlier mail , you have indicated that " In rem Jurisdiction dictates that the domain name is located in the United States " Is it for specific case or as a general Rule? Pls provide supporting materials Cheers Kavouss 2017-06-05 12:46 GMT+02:00 <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>>: I'm out of the office until June 15, inter alia, attending external meetings. Emails will not be forwarded. I will only be able to access my server from time to time. For urgent matters please contact our secretariat at ir@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:ir@bakom.admin.ch> or +41 58 460 59 39<tel:%2B41%2058%20460%2059%2039>