[CCWG-ACCT] Mission Statement language regarding grandfathering

[Andrew Sullivan]

This looks right to me.

On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 03:16:35PM +0000, Burr, Becky wrote:
> I want to circulate what I believe is the agreed upon language regarding grandfathering, just to make sure we are all on the same page.  Not quite sure how we will be handling post-publication changes like this – we will probably need to discuss on the next CCWG call.  But in the meanwhile, I want to capture the state of our discussion.
> 
> 
> 
> 3.     For the avoidance of uncertainty, the language of existing registry agreements and registrar accreditation agreements should be grandfathered.  This means that the parties who entered into existing contracts intended (and intend) to be bound by those agreements.  It means that neither a contracting party nor anyone else should be able to bring a case that any provisions of such agreements on their face are ultra vires.  It does not, however, modify any contracting party’s right to challenge the other party¹s interpretation of that language. It does not modify the right of any person or entity materially affected (as defined in the Bylaws) by an action or inaction in violation ICANN¹s Bylaws to seek redress through an IRP.  Nor does it modify the scope of ICANN’s Mission.
> 
> J. Beckwith Burr
> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
> Office: +1.202.533.2932  Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz>

> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com