[CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-jurisdiction] Documents for upcoming meeting

avri doria avri at apc.org
Thu Jun 15 19:53:46 UTC 2017

On 15-Jun-17 14:38, Greg Shatan wrote:
> you will even see that Thomas cited one of your contributions from the
> first meeting

I have now read the captioning - am very grateful for captioning and
recommend we do it for all AC meetings in ICANN. 

Quoting the captioning from Thomas:

And so I would establish in the minutes of this call that we focus on
the solution that gets most traction. Recognizing that this does not
eliminate, as I think Avri said during last week's call, that we can discuss
all issues that might arise during the deliberations. But that we actually
focus on the status quo being Californian law and place of incorporation.
And California and work on solutions that are founded on this very

I would like to discuss this.

I did say that we should work on the _assumption _that we were going to
maintain the status quo and should try and solve all of the issues on
that basis.  I did not mean to limit what the solutions might be and
certainly had no intention of limiting the set to exclude talk of
immunities. Immunities, seem to me, to be one of the tools that could
make the status quo more palatable to those who don't and can't accept it.

So while I proposed that conversation of moving be put aside, until and
unless, we found problems that could not be rmedied in  any other way, I
did not intend that proposal to be understood as putting aside
discussion of all possible immunities. This would not include all
possible immunities as some of the current accountability measure rely
on access to California courts. But not all possible immunities
necessarily contradict the assumptions of our current model.  I believe
we should still be open to discussing those.

To the degree that the current decision is immutable, after one reading,
on excluding both a planned move and discussion of any immunities, I do
not support the decision. I do support putting aside any discussion of
moving or of immunities incompatible with our current accountability
schemes, but also do support discussion of possible immunities/remedies
that do not harm the current accountability schemes.


This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list