CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All, Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective. As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting. Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date. Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly. For Greg Shatan Bernard Turcotte ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
The time change is OK with me. Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff. We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants. Dr. Milton L. Mueller Professor, School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Turcotte Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM To: ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> Subject: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300 All, Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective. As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting. Please advise acct-staff@icann.org<mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date. Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly. For Greg Shatan Bernard Turcotte ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday. But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked. I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM , I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied. Pls kindly explain. Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well Regards On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
Kavouss, I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00. You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript. I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup. Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed. After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort. Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time. I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup. Best regards, Greg Shatan On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday. But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked. I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM , I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied. Pls kindly explain. Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc es@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
Dear Greg Thank you for reply. I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that . Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting . Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone. It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group. I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues. However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed . You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected. I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations. At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters. Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert . Tks for your kind attention and advice Kavouss On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday. But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked. I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM , I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied. Pls kindly explain. Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
This is why we have written transcripts of all our calls? B., On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg Thank you for reply. I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that . Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting . Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone. It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group. I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues. However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed . You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected. I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations. At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters. Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert . Tks for your kind attention and advice Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday. But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked. I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM , I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied. Pls kindly explain. Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
Dear Kavouss, dear all, I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary. If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible. The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well. I look forward to hearing how the call goes. All bests, Jordan On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg Thank you for reply. I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that . Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting . Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone. It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group. I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues. However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed . You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected. I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations. At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters. Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert . Tks for your kind attention and advice Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday. But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked. I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM , I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied. Pls kindly explain. Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@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@internetnz.net.nz <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
+1 Paul Paul Rosenzweig <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com My PGP Key: <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684 From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jordan Carter Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM To: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> Cc: ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300 Dear Kavouss, dear all, I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary. If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible. The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well. I look forward to hearing how the call goes. All bests, Jordan On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> > wrote: Dear Greg Thank you for reply. I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that . Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting . Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone. It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group. I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues. However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed . You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected. I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations. At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters. Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert . Tks for your kind attention and advice Kavouss On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> > wrote: Kavouss, I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00. You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript. I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup. Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed. After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort. Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time. I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup. Best regards, Greg Shatan On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> > wrote: Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday. But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked. I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM , I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied. Pls kindly explain. Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well Regards On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu <mailto:milton@gatech.edu> > wrote: The time change is OK with me. Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff. We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants. Dr. Milton L. Mueller Professor, School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology 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 Bernard Turcotte Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM To: ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> >; ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> ) <acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> > Subject: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300 All, Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective. As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting. Please advise acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date. Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly. For Greg Shatan Bernard Turcotte ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 _______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive InternetNZ Office: <tel:04-495%202118> +64 4 495 2118 | Mobile: <tel:021%20442%20649> +64 21 442 649 | Skype: jordancarter Email: <mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz> jordan@internetnz.net.nz <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
Dear Bernard, It is a pity that SAM Unfortunately cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective. However, tomorrow 01 August is the National Holiday in Switzerland and must be respected by all means. See Below The *Swiss National Day* is the national holiday <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day> of Switzerland <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland>, set on 1 August. *It has been an official national holiday since 1994 *, although the day had been used for the celebration of the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy for the first time in 1891, and then repeated annually since 1899.1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-1> The date is inspired by the date of the Federal Charter of 1291 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Charter_of_1291>, *Pacte du Grutli, *placed in "early August",[2] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-2> *when "three Alpine cantons swore the oath of confederation" (Schwyz, Uri and Unterwald), *an action *which later came to be regarded as the foundation of Switzerland*."[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-swissworld-3> * needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*] The Federal Charter of 1291 first assumed great importance in a report by the Federal Department of Home Affairs <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Department_of_Home_Affairs> of 21 November 1889, suggesting a celebration in Bern <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern> in 1891 that would combine the city's 700th anniversary with the Confederacy's 600th anniversary.[*citation needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*] I remember, we did not have any meeting on 4TH July as we respected the National Holiday of American. I therefore have serious difficulties to accept the shift of the meeting from 02 to 01 August disrespecting the national holiday of a respectful nation Pls move the meeting back to 02 August Regards Kavouss On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
+1
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search= 0x9A830097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jordan Carter *Sent:* Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM *To:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Kavouss, dear all,
I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary.
If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible.
The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well.
I look forward to hearing how the call goes.
All bests,
Jordan
On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg
Thank you for reply.
I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that .
Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting .
Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone.
It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group.
I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues.
However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed .
You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected.
I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents
There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations.
At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters.
Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert .
Tks for your kind attention and advice
Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday.
But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked.
I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM ,
I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied.
Pls kindly explain.
Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well
Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@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@internetnz.net.nz
[image: Image removed by sender.] <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
Indeed, we should not have meetings on the national holiday of any nation. Here is a helpful list for August: http://www.officeholidays.com/2017/08.php Paul Paul Rosenzweig <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com My PGP Key: <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684 From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 2:12 PM To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>; Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> Cc: ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300 Dear Bernard, It is a pity that SAM Unfortunately cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective. However, tomorrow 01 August is the National Holiday in Switzerland and must be respected by all means. See Below The Swiss National Day is the <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day> national holiday of <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland> Switzerland, set on 1 August. It has been an official national holiday since 1994 , although the day had been used for the celebration of the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy for the first time in 1891, and then repeated annually since 1899. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-1> 1] The date is inspired by the date of the <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Charter_of_1291> Federal Charter of 1291, Pacte du Grutli, placed in "early August", <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-2> [2] when "three Alpine cantons swore the oath of confederation" (Schwyz, Uri and Unterwald), an action which later came to be regarded as the foundation of Switzerland." <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-swissworld-3> [3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed> needed] The Federal Charter of 1291 first assumed great importance in a report by the <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Department_of_Home_Affairs> Federal Department of Home Affairs of 21 November 1889, suggesting a celebration in <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern> Bern in 1891 that would combine the city's 700th anniversary with the Confederacy's 600th anniversary.[ <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed> citation needed] I remember, we did not have any meeting on 4TH July as we respected the National Holiday of American. I therefore have serious difficulties to accept the shift of the meeting from 02 to 01 August disrespecting the national holiday of a respectful nation Pls move the meeting back to 02 August Regards Kavouss On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> > wrote: +1 Paul Paul Rosenzweig <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <tel:(202)%20547-0660> M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <tel:(202)%20329-9650> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <tel:(202)%20738-1739> <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com My PGP Key: <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684 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 Jordan Carter Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM To: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> > Cc: ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> ) <acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> >; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300 Dear Kavouss, dear all, I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary. If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible. The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well. I look forward to hearing how the call goes. All bests, Jordan On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> > wrote: Dear Greg Thank you for reply. I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that . Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting . Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone. It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group. I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues. However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed . You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected. I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations. At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters. Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert . Tks for your kind attention and advice Kavouss On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> > wrote: Kavouss, I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00. You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript. I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup. Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed. After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort. Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time. I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup. Best regards, Greg Shatan On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> > wrote: Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday. But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked. I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM , I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied. Pls kindly explain. Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well Regards On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu <mailto:milton@gatech.edu> > wrote: The time change is OK with me. Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff. We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants. Dr. Milton L. Mueller Professor, School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology 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 Bernard Turcotte Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM To: ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> >; ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> ) <acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> > Subject: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300 All, Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective. As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting. Please advise acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date. Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly. For Greg Shatan Bernard Turcotte ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 _______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive InternetNZ Office: <tel:04-495%202118> +64 4 495 2118 | Mobile: <tel:021%20442%20649> +64 21 442 649 | Skype: jordancarter Email: <mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz> jordan@internetnz.net.nz <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
Sir, your comments is totally misleading. Regards Kavouss On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
Indeed, we should not have meetings on the national holiday of any nation. Here is a helpful list for August: http://www.officeholidays.com/ 2017/08.php
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search= 0x9A830097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kavouss Arasteh *Sent:* Monday, July 31, 2017 2:12 PM *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía < leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>; Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction < ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>
*Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Bernard,
It is a pity that SAM Unfortunately cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
However, tomorrow 01 August is the National Holiday in Switzerland and must be respected by all means. See Below
The *Swiss National Day* is the national holiday <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day> of Switzerland <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland>, set on 1 August. *It has been an official national holiday since 1994 *, although the day had been used for the celebration of the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy for the first time in 1891, and then repeated annually since 1899.1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-1>
The date is inspired by the date of the Federal Charter of 1291 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Charter_of_1291>, *Pacte du Grutli, *placed in "early August",[2] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-2> *when "three Alpine cantons swore the oath of confederation" (Schwyz, Uri and Unterwald), *an action *which later came to be regarded as the foundation of Switzerland*."[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-swissworld-3> *needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
The Federal Charter of 1291 first assumed great importance in a report by the Federal Department of Home Affairs <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Department_of_Home_Affairs> of 21 November 1889, suggesting a celebration in Bern <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern> in 1891 that would combine the city's 700th anniversary with the Confederacy's 600th anniversary.[*citation needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
I remember, we did not have any meeting on 4TH July as we respected the National Holiday of American.
I therefore have serious difficulties to accept the shift of the meeting from 02 to 01 August disrespecting the national holiday of a respectful nation
Pls move the meeting back to 02 August
Regards
Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
+1
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search= 0x9A830097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jordan Carter *Sent:* Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM *To:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Kavouss, dear all,
I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary.
If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible.
The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well.
I look forward to hearing how the call goes.
All bests,
Jordan
On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg
Thank you for reply.
I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that .
Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting .
Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone.
It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group.
I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues.
However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed .
You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected.
I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents
There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations.
At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters.
Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert .
Tks for your kind attention and advice
Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday.
But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked.
I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM ,
I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied.
Pls kindly explain.
Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well
Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@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@internetnz.net.nz
[image: Image removed by sender.] <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
Sir, Pls indicate ,based on the participation list at the Sub Group, who from those long list attend the sub group . But from Switzerland ,at least three Moreover, I do not understand Los Angles day, we are talking of National Holidays NOT REGIONAL OR URBAN HOLIDAYSD Regards Kavouss On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Sir, your comments is totally misleading. Regards Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
Indeed, we should not have meetings on the national holiday of any nation. Here is a helpful list for August: http://www.officeholidays.com/2017/08.php
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830 097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc es@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kavouss Arasteh *Sent:* Monday, July 31, 2017 2:12 PM *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía < leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>; Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction < ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>
*Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Bernard,
It is a pity that SAM Unfortunately cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
However, tomorrow 01 August is the National Holiday in Switzerland and must be respected by all means. See Below
The *Swiss National Day* is the national holiday <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day> of Switzerland <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland>, set on 1 August. *It has been an official national holiday since 1994 *, although the day had been used for the celebration of the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy for the first time in 1891, and then repeated annually since 1899.1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-1>
The date is inspired by the date of the Federal Charter of 1291 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Charter_of_1291>, *Pacte du Grutli, *placed in "early August",[2] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-2> *when "three Alpine cantons swore the oath of confederation" (Schwyz, Uri and Unterwald), *an action *which later came to be regarded as the foundation of Switzerland*."[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-swissworld-3> *needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
The Federal Charter of 1291 first assumed great importance in a report by the Federal Department of Home Affairs <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Department_of_Home_Affairs> of 21 November 1889, suggesting a celebration in Bern <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern> in 1891 that would combine the city's 700th anniversary with the Confederacy's 600th anniversary.[*citation needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
I remember, we did not have any meeting on 4TH July as we respected the National Holiday of American.
I therefore have serious difficulties to accept the shift of the meeting from 02 to 01 August disrespecting the national holiday of a respectful nation
Pls move the meeting back to 02 August
Regards
Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
+1
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830 097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc es@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jordan Carter *Sent:* Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM *To:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Kavouss, dear all,
I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary.
If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible.
The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well.
I look forward to hearing how the call goes.
All bests,
Jordan
On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg
Thank you for reply.
I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that .
Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting .
Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone.
It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group.
I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues.
However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed .
You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected.
I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents
There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations.
At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters.
Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert .
Tks for your kind attention and advice
Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday.
But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked.
I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM ,
I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied.
Pls kindly explain.
Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well
Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc es@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@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@internetnz.net.nz
[image: Image removed by sender.] <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
Just for reference . . . http://www.itv.com/news/channel/2016-12-15/alderney-celebrates-homecoming-da... On 31/07/17 19:53, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
Sir, Pls indicate ,based on the participation list at the Sub Group, who from those long list attend the sub group . But from Switzerland ,at least three Moreover, I do not understand Los Angles day, we are talking of National Holidays NOT REGIONAL OR URBAN HOLIDAYSD Regards Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> wrote:
Sir, your comments is totally misleading. Regards Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote:
Indeed, we should not have meetings on the national holiday of any nation. Here is a helpful list for August: http://www.officeholidays.com/2017/08.php <http://www.officeholidays.com/2017/08.php>____
__ __
Paul____
__ __
Paul Rosenzweig____
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>____
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <tel:(202)%20547-0660>____
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <tel:(202)%20329-9650>____
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <tel:(202)%20738-1739>____
www.redbranchconsulting.com <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/>____
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684 <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684>____
__ __
*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 *Kavouss Arasteh *Sent:* Monday, July 31, 2017 2:12 PM *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>>; Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de <mailto:rickert@anwaelte.de>>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com <mailto:turcotte.bernard@gmail.com>> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>>
*Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300____
__ __
Dear Bernard,____
It is a pity that SAM Unfortunately cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.____
However, tomorrow 01 August is the National Holiday in Switzerland and must be respected by all means. See Below____
The *Swiss National Day* is the national holiday <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day>of Switzerland <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland>, set on 1 August.__*It has been an official national holiday since 1994 *, although the day had been used for the celebration of the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy for the first time in 1891, and then repeated annually since 1899.^1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-1> ____
The date is inspired by the date of the Federal Charter of 1291 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Charter_of_1291>, *_Pacte du Grutli, _*placed in "early August",^[2] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-2> *_when "three Alpine cantons swore the oath of confederation" (Schwyz, Uri and Unterwald), _*an action *which later came to be regarded as the foundation of Switzerland*."^[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-swissworld-3> /^needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed> /^] ____
The Federal Charter of 1291 first assumed great importance in a report by the Federal Department of Home Affairs <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Department_of_Home_Affairs>of 21 November 1889, suggesting a celebration in Bern <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern>in 1891 that would combine the city's 700th anniversary with the Confederacy's 600thanniversary.^[ /^citation needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed> /^] ____
^I remember, we did not have any meeting on 4TH July as we respected the National Holiday of American. ____
^I therefore have serious difficulties to accept the shift of the meeting from 02 to 01 August disrespecting the national holiday of a respectful nation ____
^Pls move the meeting back to 02 August ____
^Regards ____
^Kavouss ____
__ __
__ __
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>> wrote:____
+1 ____
____
Paul____
____
Paul Rosenzweig____
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>____
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <tel:(202)%20547-0660>____
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <tel:(202)%20329-9650>____
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <tel:(202)%20738-1739>____
www.redbranchconsulting.com <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/>____
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684 <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684>____
____
*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 *Jordan Carter *Sent:* Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM *To:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>) <acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300____
____
Dear Kavouss, dear all,____
____
I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary.____
____
If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible.____
The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well.____
____
I look forward to hearing how the call goes.____
____
All bests,____
Jordan____
____
____
On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> wrote:____
Dear Greg____
Thank you for reply.____
I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that .____
Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting .____
Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone.____
It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group.____
I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues.____
However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed .____
You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected.____
I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents ____
There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations.____
At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters.____
Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert .____
Tks for your kind attention and advice____
Kavouss ____
____
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com>> wrote:____
Kavouss,____
____
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00. ____
____
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.____
____
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.____
____
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed. ____
____
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.____
____
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.____
____
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.____
____
Best regards,____
____
Greg Shatan____
____
____
____
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> wrote:____
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday.____
But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked.____
I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM ,____
I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied.____
Pls kindly explain.____
Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well ____
Regards____
____
____
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu <mailto:milton@gatech.edu>> wrote:____
The time change is OK with me. ____
____
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff. ____
____
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants. ____
____
Dr. Milton L. Mueller____
Professor, School of Public Policy____
Georgia Institute of Technology____
____
____
____
____
*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 *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>>; ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>) <acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300____
____
All,____
____
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.____
____
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.____
____
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org> by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.____
____
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.____
____
For Greg Shatan____
____
Bernard Turcotte____
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2____
____
_______________________________________________ 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>____
____
____
____
____
____
-- ____
*Jordan Carter*____
*Chief Executive*____
*InternetNZ*____
____
Office: +64 4 495 2118 <tel:04-495%202118> | Mobile: +64 21 442 649 <tel:021%20442%20649> | Skype: jordancarter____
Email: jordan@internetnz.net.nz <mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>____
____
Image removed by sender. <https://2017.nethui.nz/>____
__ __
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
All, I would like to see if there is significant support in the Subgroup for moving this week's call back to Wednesday, August 2 at 13:00 UTC based on the request from Kavouss Arasteh below. I note the following (1) if we move the call back to Wednesday, Sam Eisner can't join us and thus we would not have the OFAC-related discussion planned for this week, (2) Mr. Arasteh approved the move from Wednesday to Tuesday in an email on Friday, July 28, and (3) Virgin of Los Angeles Day on August 2 is a national holiday in Costa Rica, not a regional or urban holiday (the Virgin of Los Angeles is the patron saint of Costa Rica). In the absence of significant support in the Subgroup, we will keep the call schedule as is. Please weigh in quickly as time is very tight for such scheduling changes. Thank you. Greg On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 2:53 PM Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Sir, Pls indicate ,based on the participation list at the Sub Group, who from those long list attend the sub group . But from Switzerland ,at least three Moreover, I do not understand Los Angles day, we are talking of National Holidays NOT REGIONAL OR URBAN HOLIDAYSD Regards Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Sir, your comments is totally misleading. Regards Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
Indeed, we should not have meetings on the national holiday of any nation. Here is a helpful list for August: http://www.officeholidays.com/2017/08.php
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kavouss Arasteh *Sent:* Monday, July 31, 2017 2:12 PM *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía < leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>; Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction < ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>
*Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Bernard,
It is a pity that SAM Unfortunately cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
However, tomorrow 01 August is the National Holiday in Switzerland and must be respected by all means. See Below
The *Swiss National Day* is the national holiday <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day> of Switzerland <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland>, set on 1 August. *It has been an official national holiday since 1994 *, although the day had been used for the celebration of the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy for the first time in 1891, and then repeated annually since 1899.1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-1>
The date is inspired by the date of the Federal Charter of 1291 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Charter_of_1291>, *Pacte du Grutli, *placed in "early August",[2] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-2> *when "three Alpine cantons swore the oath of confederation" (Schwyz, Uri and Unterwald), *an action *which later came to be regarded as the foundation of Switzerland*."[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-swissworld-3> *needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
The Federal Charter of 1291 first assumed great importance in a report by the Federal Department of Home Affairs <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Department_of_Home_Affairs> of 21 November 1889, suggesting a celebration in Bern <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern> in 1891 that would combine the city's 700th anniversary with the Confederacy's 600th anniversary.[*citation needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
I remember, we did not have any meeting on 4TH July as we respected the National Holiday of American.
I therefore have serious difficulties to accept the shift of the meeting from 02 to 01 August disrespecting the national holiday of a respectful nation
Pls move the meeting back to 02 August
Regards
Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
+1
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jordan Carter *Sent:* Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM *To:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Kavouss, dear all,
I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary.
If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible.
The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well.
I look forward to hearing how the call goes.
All bests,
Jordan
On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg
Thank you for reply.
I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that .
Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting .
Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone.
It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group.
I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues.
However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed .
You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected.
I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents
There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations.
At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters.
Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert .
Tks for your kind attention and advice
Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday.
But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked.
I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM ,
I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied.
Pls kindly explain.
Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well
Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@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@internetnz.net.nz
[image: Image removed by sender.] <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
Dear Greg, Thank you very much for your message. There are incoherence and inconsistencies and lack of standards or double standards in that message as briefly discussed below *Your introductory 7 opening part of the message.* *1.“I would like to see if there is significant support in the Subgroup for moving this week's call back to Wednesday, August 2 at 13:00 UTC based on the request from Kavouss Arasteh below”. * *Reply * *This is provocative in the sense that you know many people do not appreciate active participation of people with integrity at the meeting and they make every effort to negate and oppose to all his proposal in a categorical manner . Thus raising such such would turn the discussion into a total divergence manner * *2.”I note the following (1) if we move the call back to Wednesday, Sam Eisner can't join us and thus we would not have the OFAC-related discussion planned for this week,* *Reply* *While we welcome any information provided by ICANN staff but we should in no way be bow down and be subordinated or yielded by their wishes. If she is unable to attend, there would be neither earthquake nor Surname. She will do at the subsequent meeting.* *Moreover, what she intends to tell us we do not know? We do not expect to receive some cut and paste information from a very substantial well-structured information on OFAC .What we wanted were the questions that I raised, namely the application and implementation of certain OFAC terms and provisions to g TLD and cc TLD that was not agreed or rejected by you.* *We do not need partial ,incomplete information based on one ICANN Staff as we are sufficiently mature to get the description and functions of OFAC, as I mentioned we need to clearly know the application and implementation of certain OFAC terms and provisions to g TLD and cc TLD that was not agreed or rejected by you.* *3 “ (2) Mr. Arasteh approved the move from Wednesday to Tuesday in an email on Friday, July 28, and (3) Virgin of Los Angeles Day on August 2 is a national holiday in Costa Rica, not a regional or urban holiday (the Virgin of Los Angeles is the patron saint of Costa Rica”* *Reply.* *I have seen the same reply from another Member of the Group: a well coordinated view ha ha???* *Please note that I was referring to National Holidays of a respectful country from which there are three active participants at the meeting. I do not understand reference to Los Angles state as I referred to only to sovereign country and not a State7 County within a country. Moreover, while I fully respect the national holiday of those countries but there has been no participants from those countries in our over 30 meeting at all* *4” In the absence of significant support in the Subgroup, we will keep the call schedule as is”.* *Reply* *Your statement is inappropriate because a9 when you moved the meeting from Wednesday to Tuesday (Because of Mrs. Samantha Eisner????) ,**you did not ask whether there was significant support ????? **Then why you asking for significant support knowing that several people are against my intervention because they are against THE SINGER and Not THE SONG.* *Then **I asked you to shift the sense of the question and ask whether there is significant opposition to my request. *In addition I do not know out of 25 participant what constitutes *“Significant* * *5. I simply said tomorrow is the National Holiday of Switzerland and since there are several participants from that country at the meeting, we need to respect that National Day. If you do not respect that and compare NATIONAL Day of Switzerland wit** Virgin of Los Angeles, I am sorry to say it is a disproportionate comparison* *Once again ,if you want to ask question about my proposal to go bacjk to the initially planned day and not the day which just meets one ICANN Staff REQUIREMENT you need to raise the following question * *Kavouss Arasteh argued that the meeting was initially planned for Wednesday 02 Augusts since several day which people planned their agenda but since one ICANN staff was unable to attend that meeting on 02 August, the Secretariat and the rapporteur by using default position change the meeting day which unfortunately fall with Swiss National Holiday. Kavouss respectfully appealed to all to respect the National Holiday of Switzerland and go back to the initial meeting day which was planned / schedules long time ago* *Question* *“IS THERE STRONG AND SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITION TO Kavouss, proposal to revert back to Wednesday 02 August* *Please weigh in quickly as time is very tight for such scheduling changes.* On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 10:01 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
All,
I would like to see if there is significant support in the Subgroup for moving this week's call back to Wednesday, August 2 at 13:00 UTC based on the request from Kavouss Arasteh below.
I note the following (1) if we move the call back to Wednesday, Sam Eisner can't join us and thus we would not have the OFAC-related discussion planned for this week, (2) Mr. Arasteh approved the move from Wednesday to Tuesday in an email on Friday, July 28, and (3) Virgin of Los Angeles Day on August 2 is a national holiday in Costa Rica, not a regional or urban holiday (the Virgin of Los Angeles is the patron saint of Costa Rica).
In the absence of significant support in the Subgroup, we will keep the call schedule as is.
Please weigh in quickly as time is very tight for such scheduling changes.
Thank you.
Greg
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 2:53 PM Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Sir, Pls indicate ,based on the participation list at the Sub Group, who from those long list attend the sub group . But from Switzerland ,at least three Moreover, I do not understand Los Angles day, we are talking of National Holidays NOT REGIONAL OR URBAN HOLIDAYSD Regards Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Sir, your comments is totally misleading. Regards Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
Indeed, we should not have meetings on the national holiday of any nation. Here is a helpful list for August: http://www.officeholidays.com/2017/08.php
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search= 0x9A830097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kavouss Arasteh *Sent:* Monday, July 31, 2017 2:12 PM *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>; Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction < ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>
*Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Bernard,
It is a pity that SAM Unfortunately cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
However, tomorrow 01 August is the National Holiday in Switzerland and must be respected by all means. See Below
The *Swiss National Day* is the national holiday <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day> of Switzerland <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland>, set on 1 August. *It has been an official national holiday since 1994 *, although the day had been used for the celebration of the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy for the first time in 1891, and then repeated annually since 1899.1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-1>
The date is inspired by the date of the Federal Charter of 1291 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Charter_of_1291>, *Pacte du Grutli, *placed in "early August",[2] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-2> *when "three Alpine cantons swore the oath of confederation" (Schwyz, Uri and Unterwald), *an action *which later came to be regarded as the foundation of Switzerland*."[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-swissworld-3> *needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
The Federal Charter of 1291 first assumed great importance in a report by the Federal Department of Home Affairs <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Department_of_Home_Affairs> of 21 November 1889, suggesting a celebration in Bern <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern> in 1891 that would combine the city's 700th anniversary with the Confederacy's 600th anniversary.[*citation needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
I remember, we did not have any meeting on 4TH July as we respected the National Holiday of American.
I therefore have serious difficulties to accept the shift of the meeting from 02 to 01 August disrespecting the national holiday of a respectful nation
Pls move the meeting back to 02 August
Regards
Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
+1
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search= 0x9A830097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jordan Carter *Sent:* Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM *To:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Kavouss, dear all,
I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary.
If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible.
The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well.
I look forward to hearing how the call goes.
All bests,
Jordan
On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg
Thank you for reply.
I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that .
Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting .
Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone.
It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group.
I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues.
However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed .
You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected.
I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents
There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations.
At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters.
Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert .
Tks for your kind attention and advice
Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday.
But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked.
I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM ,
I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied.
Pls kindly explain.
Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well
Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@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@internetnz.net.nz
[image: Image removed by sender.] <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
Hello Kavouss, Unless am missing something, it seem to me that the Swiss holiday you refer is captured in the URL shared by Paul. Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Jul 31, 2017 7:47 PM, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Sir, your comments is totally misleading. Regards Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@ redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
Indeed, we should not have meetings on the national holiday of any nation. Here is a helpful list for August: http://www.officeholidays.com/2017/08.php
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830 097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc es@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kavouss Arasteh *Sent:* Monday, July 31, 2017 2:12 PM *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía < leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>; Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de>; Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction < ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>
*Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Bernard,
It is a pity that SAM Unfortunately cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
However, tomorrow 01 August is the National Holiday in Switzerland and must be respected by all means. See Below
The *Swiss National Day* is the national holiday <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day> of Switzerland <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland>, set on 1 August. *It has been an official national holiday since 1994 *, although the day had been used for the celebration of the foundation of the Swiss Confederacy for the first time in 1891, and then repeated annually since 1899.1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-1>
The date is inspired by the date of the Federal Charter of 1291 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Charter_of_1291>, *Pacte du Grutli, *placed in "early August",[2] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-2> *when "three Alpine cantons swore the oath of confederation" (Schwyz, Uri and Unterwald), *an action *which later came to be regarded as the foundation of Switzerland*."[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_National_Day#cite_note-swissworld-3> *needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
The Federal Charter of 1291 first assumed great importance in a report by the Federal Department of Home Affairs <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Department_of_Home_Affairs> of 21 November 1889, suggesting a celebration in Bern <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bern> in 1891 that would combine the city's 700th anniversary with the Confederacy's 600th anniversary.[*citation needed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>*]
I remember, we did not have any meeting on 4TH July as we respected the National Holiday of American.
I therefore have serious difficulties to accept the shift of the meeting from 02 to 01 August disrespecting the national holiday of a respectful nation
Pls move the meeting back to 02 August
Regards
Kavouss
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Paul Rosenzweig < paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
+1
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830 097CA066684
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc es@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jordan Carter *Sent:* Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:39 PM *To:* Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc:* ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org>; ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
Dear Kavouss, dear all,
I would like to lend my support to the process that Greg has set out. It is important for the integrity of the CCWG's process that decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole or by the CCWG plenary.
If the Jurisdiction group decides that the sort of written material being requested is required, then I am sure that ICANN will look favourably at that request and provide it as soon as possible.
The written transcripts of the call will help make any verbal briefings and information available and easier to understand as well.
I look forward to hearing how the call goes.
All bests,
Jordan
On 31 July 2017 at 07:40, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg
Thank you for reply.
I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that .
Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting .
Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone.
It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group.
I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues.
However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed .
You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected.
I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents
There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations.
At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters.
Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert .
Tks for your kind attention and advice
Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday.
But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked.
I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM ,
I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied.
Pls kindly explain.
Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well
Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc es@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@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@internetnz.net.nz
[image: Image removed by sender.] <https://2017.nethui.nz/>
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
Kavouss, You seem to have misunderstood my email. I did not say that there was no support for addressing the OFAC issue (or issues). I did not say that OFAC would be "ignored." I certainly did not "put you in a corner." I have no idea how you came up with that. I will assume the best, that there was some sort of miscommunication or misunderstanding. All I said was that there was no support in the Subgroup for your request to have ICANN Legal prepare a comprehensive written history background document to be distributed before the call. As Jordan Carter stated, "decisions about what work to request from ICANN are made by sub-groups as a whole." This request was not "rejected" by me. It failed to get any traction in the call or on the list. As Jordan also notes, we have both real-time captioning and transcripts that will enable you to read, during and after the call, what Sam has to say. This should give you the opportunity to review and make sure you understand what Sam said, and to ask questions about anything that is unclear (probably a better approach any time there is a failure to understand what is being communicated). Whether you are "alone on the issue" of requesting a written document, I cannot say. As rapporteur, I can only respond to those who participate on the call and on the email list, where the issue of a written document has been amply exposed by you, without other support. I would note that your request that such a document be available 24 hours prior to the call would mean that Sam would have had to prepare the document by 6:00 am Los Angeles time tomorrow (Monday). I would expect that any worthwhile document on this subject would take a substantial amount of time to prepare, including research and discussions, writing, revision and review. This would likely have pushed the OFAC discussion off by several weeks. I expect that other members of the Subgroup took this into account in declining to support your request. In any event, I am fairly confident that we will have ample opportunity for any follow-up that the Subgroup decides is necessary. Finally, I must take exception to the insinuations in your emails. Nothing was done by "me and my colleagues." I have no "colleagues" or "supporters" in this Subgroup. I am not pushing for any points. I have taken pains to be a neutral rapporteur, while at the same time trying to identify and build on points of agreement to find consensus in the group on issues of substance and procedure. If there are any "motivations" with regard to OFAC, they are not mine -- and I doubt that there are any "motivations" of other members in the Subgroup (although stakeholders are fully expected to have points of view). None of us (other than ICANN the organization) are involved in "applying" OFAC to ICANN. I would kindly ask you to reconsider your accusations, veiled and otherwise, which I believe are not consistent with ICANN's Standards of Behavior. I would prefer to spend time on matters of substance, and I believe the rest of the Subgroup does as well. I hope that we can now turn in that direction. Best regards, Greg On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Greg Thank you for reply. I know many people do not wish to react or act on OFAC as they would like that such unreasonable continued to be applied to some limited number of countries . You may not have any point to do that . Sam Eisner explanation MUST BE IN WRITTEN FORM as I have serious difficulties to understand her message while she may speak very well but I have difficulty to get the message so I want an advance copy of her explanation before the meeting . Pls note that I am not alone on the issue. If there are not other people at call that does not mean that I am alone. It seems that OFAC ISSUE WILL NOT BE TREATED since according to you there is no support for that. That is not what we expected from your Group. I know that there must be other motivation than technical and administrative that this question is rejected by you and your colleagues. However, this is an important issue and MUST be addressed . You can not ignore it even if there are few countries affected. I will not leave as such to be put at corner by you. I will insist and ask for a written documents There is no relation with state assets and DNS .There were and still there are other motivation to apply it and other motivation NOT to address it. I do not know what are those motivations. At any meeting you as a participants push and sushi for your points and taking considerable amount of time of the meeting since you have several supporters. Pls kindly reconsider your position and be a little bit helpful and not categorically object to my legitimate requiert . Tks for your kind attention and advice Kavouss
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Kavouss,
I am responding to your various emails regarding your request that ICANN Legal be required to prepare a comprehensive "written history background Document" on OFAC and ICANN before meeting with the Jurisdiction Subgroup. As you know, Samantha Eisner from ICANN Legal is scheduled to meet with the Jurisdiction Subgroup on Tuesday, August 1 at 13:00.
You suggested this course of action in the Jurisdiction Subgroup meeting on July 26. There was no other support for this course of action in the Subgroup meeting. At that time, I proposed that we would start by hearing from ICANN legal in the meeting and engaging in Q&A with ICANN. The Subgroup would then be able to decide if we needed to ask ICANN further questions, if we wanted written responses, etc. There was no opposition to this course of action, other than from yourself. I believe this is all reflected in the transcript.
I will note that, subsequent to the meeting, no one from the Subgroup has responded to your emails in support of your request. In conjunction with the results in the Subgroup meeting, I believe it fair to conclude that there is not sufficient support for your request in the Subgroup.
Therefore, we will proceed as agreed on the last call and documented in the transcript. We will hear from ICANN Legal and ask questions. The Subgroup (and not any single participant) will then decide what, if any, follow-up is needed.
After this email, I will send out an email to the list requesting questions for ICANN Legal, which we can provide them in advance of the call. I hope that you will contribute to this effort.
Please note that there are times when professional and personal obligations may prevent from responding to ICANN-related emails as quickly as I might wish. As with all of my ICANN activities, I am acting as Rapporteur entirely on a volunteer basis, which is only possible if I meet my obligations to my employer and our clients, devote some time to my family, and attend to other responsibilities that may be pressing at any given time.
I look forward to your continued contributions to the work of the Jurisdiction Subgroup.
Best regards,
Greg Shatan
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Grec, I have no problem for moving that meeting by one day to Tuseday. But I insist that before the meeting we need a written history background Document as I have asked. I think this is absolutely necessary e to have a written doc. in addition to verbal explanation by SAM , I do not understand why my e-mail has not been replied. Pls kindly explain. Herb is kindly requested to monitor the process as I will take the non reply formally to him and to the co-chairs that till now have not reacted even though I copied my correspendenc to them as well Regards
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:41 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:
The time change is OK with me.
Hopefully we can devote all of the call to Q&A on OFAC and choice of law and can dispense with the other stuff.
We might also provide a channel for advance submission of questions so that the opportunity to ask questions is fairly distributed among different subgroup participants.
Dr. Milton L. Mueller
Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology
*From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Bernard Turcotte *Sent:* Wednesday, July 26, 2017 6:26 PM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>; ACCT-Staff ( acct-staff@icann.org) <acct-staff@icann.org> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Meeting Scheduled for Wednesday 2 August 1300
All,
Unfortunately Sam Eisner cannot join our Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting but could participate on Tuesday 1 August 1300 to cover the topics of OFAC and Choice of Law from the ICANN perspective.
As such Greg is suggesting that we move our scheduled meeting to Tuesday 1 August 1300 and cancel the Wednesday 2 August 1300 meeting.
Please advise acct-staff@icann.org by 23:59 UTC 27 July if you have serious objections to this change of date.
Greg will consider the responses and confirm his decision regarding this by the EOB tomorrow to allow everyone to plan accordingly.
For Greg Shatan
Bernard Turcotte
ICANN Support Staff to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
participants (8)
-
Bernard Turcotte -
Greg Shatan -
Jordan Carter -
Kavouss Arasteh -
Mueller, Milton L -
Nigel Roberts -
Paul Rosenzweig -
Seun Ojedeji