Multiple Layers of Jurisdiction Document
Dear Greg and all As I see the situation and progress of this group, I feel that perhaps it is time to develop a community consultation on the basis of the two rough docs we have (multiple layers and the influence doc), requesting stakeholder input on their experience and opinions about the different issues we preliminarily have identified as a group in both docs (especially in the “influence” doc). This would allow us to assess where specific problems are, what the needs of the community are, and, possibly, also request some ideas on possible solutions to the problems identified. Perhaps it is still too early, but I think that in Hyderabad there was some agreement in the room that this fact-finding exercise could lead us to the next level in our discussions… Best regards Jorge Von: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Montag, 21. November 2016 19:48 An: ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org Betreff: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple Layers of Jurisdiction Document Here is the current state of this document.
Hi Jorge, all I think it is to early. I am uncomfortable with the idea of sending out the "influence" doc in particular as it contains a number of questions and hypotheses that would preferably be answered beforehand. I do not believe a document should be circulated for comment and possible solutions when some of the issues raised in the document may not actually be problems at all. This would be unnecessarily confusing. Preferably these unknowns would be answered, resolved or discarded before the doc is circulated. Matthew On 21/11/2016 18:55, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Greg and all
As I see the situation and progress of this group, I feel that perhaps it is time to develop a community consultation on the basis of the two rough docs we have (multiple layers and the influence doc), requesting stakeholder input on their experience and opinions about the different issues we preliminarily have identified as a group in both docs (especially in the “influence” doc).
This would allow us to assess where specific problems are, what the needs of the community are, and, possibly, also request some ideas on possible solutions to the problems identified.
Perhaps it is still too early, but I think that in Hyderabad there was some agreement in the room that this fact-finding exercise could lead us to the next level in our discussions…
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:*ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Greg Shatan *Gesendet:* Montag, 21. November 2016 19:48 *An:* ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org *Betreff:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple Layers of Jurisdiction Document
Here is the current state of this document.
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
-- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 771 2472987 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Mathiew+1 Kavouss 2016-11-22 17:11 GMT+01:00 matthew shears <mshears@cdt.org>:
Hi Jorge, all
I think it is to early. I am uncomfortable with the idea of sending out the "influence" doc in particular as it contains a number of questions and hypotheses that would preferably be answered beforehand. I do not believe a document should be circulated for comment and possible solutions when some of the issues raised in the document may not actually be problems at all. This would be unnecessarily confusing. Preferably these unknowns would be answered, resolved or discarded before the doc is circulated. Matthew
On 21/11/2016 18:55, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Greg and all
As I see the situation and progress of this group, I feel that perhaps it is time to develop a community consultation on the basis of the two rough docs we have (multiple layers and the influence doc), requesting stakeholder input on their experience and opinions about the different issues we preliminarily have identified as a group in both docs (especially in the “influence” doc).
This would allow us to assess where specific problems are, what the needs of the community are, and, possibly, also request some ideas on possible solutions to the problems identified.
Perhaps it is still too early, but I think that in Hyderabad there was some agreement in the room that this fact-finding exercise could lead us to the next level in our discussions…
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org <ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org>] *Im Auftrag von *Greg Shatan *Gesendet:* Montag, 21. November 2016 19:48 *An:* ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org *Betreff:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple Layers of Jurisdiction Document
Here is the current state of this document.
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing listWs2-jurisdiction@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
-- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)+ 44 771 2472987
------------------------------ [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...>
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
Hi Matthew and Kavouss, the decision arrived at during the meeting was to draft a brief set of questions, aimed at a wider group of stakeholders. The purpose would be to solicit factual input relevant to the issue we are considering, ie. “The Influence of ICANN’s Existing Jurisdictions (Governing Law and Venue) Relating to Resolution of Disputes”. The intention isn't to open up either of the two documents for public input or comment at this point, or ask for potential solutions. Hope that clarifies. Regards, Vinay On 22 November 2016 at 21:41, matthew shears <mshears@cdt.org> wrote:
Hi Jorge, all
I think it is to early. I am uncomfortable with the idea of sending out the "influence" doc in particular as it contains a number of questions and hypotheses that would preferably be answered beforehand. I do not believe a document should be circulated for comment and possible solutions when some of the issues raised in the document may not actually be problems at all. This would be unnecessarily confusing. Preferably these unknowns would be answered, resolved or discarded before the doc is circulated. Matthew
On 21/11/2016 18:55, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch wrote:
Dear Greg and all
As I see the situation and progress of this group, I feel that perhaps it is time to develop a community consultation on the basis of the two rough docs we have (multiple layers and the influence doc), requesting stakeholder input on their experience and opinions about the different issues we preliminarily have identified as a group in both docs (especially in the “influence” doc).
This would allow us to assess where specific problems are, what the needs of the community are, and, possibly, also request some ideas on possible solutions to the problems identified.
Perhaps it is still too early, but I think that in Hyderabad there was some agreement in the room that this fact-finding exercise could lead us to the next level in our discussions…
Best regards
Jorge
*Von:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction- bounces@icann.org <ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org>] *Im Auftrag von *Greg Shatan *Gesendet:* Montag, 21. November 2016 19:48 *An:* ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org *Betreff:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple Layers of Jurisdiction Document
Here is the current state of this document.
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing listWs2-jurisdiction@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
-- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)+ 44 771 2472987
------------------------------ [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...>
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
Thank you Vinay. That seems to be a reasonable way forward, which I support. Best Rafael De: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] En nombre de Vinay Kesari Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de noviembre de 2016 9:39 Para: matthew shears CC: ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org Asunto: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple Layers of Jurisdiction Document Hi Matthew and Kavouss, the decision arrived at during the meeting was to draft a brief set of questions, aimed at a wider group of stakeholders. The purpose would be to solicit factual input relevant to the issue we are considering, ie. “The Influence of ICANN’s Existing Jurisdictions (Governing Law and Venue) Relating to Resolution of Disputes”. The intention isn't to open up either of the two documents for public input or comment at this point, or ask for potential solutions. Hope that clarifies. Regards, Vinay On 22 November 2016 at 21:41, matthew shears <mshears@cdt.org<mailto:mshears@cdt.org>> wrote: Hi Jorge, all I think it is to early. I am uncomfortable with the idea of sending out the "influence" doc in particular as it contains a number of questions and hypotheses that would preferably be answered beforehand. I do not believe a document should be circulated for comment and possible solutions when some of the issues raised in the document may not actually be problems at all. This would be unnecessarily confusing. Preferably these unknowns would be answered, resolved or discarded before the doc is circulated. Matthew On 21/11/2016 18:55, Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch<mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> wrote: Dear Greg and all As I see the situation and progress of this group, I feel that perhaps it is time to develop a community consultation on the basis of the two rough docs we have (multiple layers and the influence doc), requesting stakeholder input on their experience and opinions about the different issues we preliminarily have identified as a group in both docs (especially in the “influence” doc). This would allow us to assess where specific problems are, what the needs of the community are, and, possibly, also request some ideas on possible solutions to the problems identified. Perhaps it is still too early, but I think that in Hyderabad there was some agreement in the room that this fact-finding exercise could lead us to the next level in our discussions… Best regards Jorge Von: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] Im Auftrag von Greg Shatan Gesendet: Montag, 21. November 2016 19:48 An: ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org<mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> Betreff: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple Layers of Jurisdiction Document Here is the current state of this document. _______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org<mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction -- ------------ Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 771 2472987<tel:%2B%2044%20771%202472987> ________________________________ <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...> _______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...>
participants (6)
-
Greg Shatan -
Jorge.Cancio＠bakom.admin.ch -
Kavouss Arasteh -
matthew shears -
Perez Galindo, Rafael -
Vinay Kesari