[CCWG-ACCT] [GAC] Jurisdiction Subgroup. Draft Report. Statement of Brazil. Annex. To be annexed to the draft report. For consideration by the CCWG.

Raphaël BEAUREGARD-LACROIX raphael.beauregardlacroix at sciencespo.fr
Sun Oct 15 13:10:36 UTC 2017

Dear all,

The way I see it is that we were as individual members responsible to bring
up issues and to come up with draft recommendations on that basis.

Quoting the Brazilian submission :

*"many views and contributions made during the process – including in some
cases our own – were systematically disregarded or ignored, with no effort
being made to build consensus and bridge differences with respect to these
views and contributions."*

This statement is, in my view, valid only to the extent that it falls with
the Rapporteur of the subgroup to turn *all *(and I would add here,
"systematically" all) issues raised into draft recommendations. That is not
my understanding of the work of a Rapporteur, nor does it seem to be
Greg's, in this instance.

As Jorge points out, we have had a few inconclusive discussions on several
topics and I do not think that anyone here is under a duty to write up a
draft recommendation on the basis of an inconclusive discussion.

Rather, if some members of this subgroup perceive that consensus can be
reached on a specific issue, it is up to them to present a draft
recommendation to the subgroup, or at least to take the necessary measures
to start some work on that. This was not done within the time limit set, it
is unfortunate indeed, but we were all in the same boat on that.

That is my understanding, which does not seem to be shared by everyone.
Maybe a clarification on that matter is warranted, would it be only for the
sake of future work under that format.

As for what is to be done with this submission, I do not have a strong
preference for a specific solution, although leaving it as is does not seem
to be the most appropriate thing to do at this point, given its level of



2017-10-15 14:22 GMT+02:00 <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>:

> Dear Thiago, dear all,
> Thanks for these comments.
> Personally I'm a bit unclear why some of the issues identified as such by
> members of the Jurisdiction Subgroup (was it in August, when we lastly did
> so after being requested doing so?) did not receive the form of draft
> recommendations in the Subgroup.
> Regarding tailored or limited immunities (remembering how Thomas Rickert
> had described this when the scope was last discussed...), we had various
> debates on it  mainly on list that were rather inconclusive (the way I
> remember it).
> At the same time when we were asked to identify issues to be discussed, if
> my recollection is correct, Thiago presented an issue proposal... So I
> wonder why this did not get into the recommendation debate stage.
> With this I do not suggest to enter a lengthy procedural discussion.
> What I would suggest instead is that we request our Brazilian colleagues
> (and other potentially interested members) to recirculate the issue they
> had prepared some months ago in the Subgroup and adapt it to a
> recommendation format.
>  This would allow us to discuss the substance in a focused manner in the
> Subgroup and get back to the Plenary asap.
> In a way it would be unfair to all of us not to hold this "final"
> discussion on this subject after having been presented repeatedly in the
> CCWG and the Subgroup, when we are still on time (very late I know, but
> with room to do so).
> hope this helps
> kind regards
> Jorge
> ________________________________
> Von: Thiago Braz Jardim Oliveira <thiago.jardim at itamaraty.gov.br>
> Datum: 15. Oktober 2017 um 03:15:05 MESZ
> An: accountability-cross-community at icann.org <accountability-cross-
> community at icann.org>
> Cc: ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>, acct-staff at icann.org <
> acct-staff at icann.org>, gac at icann.org <gac at icann.org>, GAC <
> gac at gac.icann.org>
> Betreff: [GAC] Jurisdiction Subgroup. Draft Report. Statement of Brazil.
> Annex. To be annexed to the draft report. For consideration by the CCWG.
> Dear all,
> On behalf of the Brazilian Government, I hereby submit the "Statement of
> Brazil" and its annex, which are to be annexed to the draft report of the
> jurisdiction subgroup, submitted on 11 October 2017, for consideration by
> the CCWG plenary.
> Best regards,
> Thiago
> ________________________________
> De: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org]
> em nome de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc at gmail.com]
> Enviado: quinta-feira, 12 de outubro de 2017 23:29
> Para: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> Cc: acct-staff at icann.org; ws2-jurisdiction
> Assunto: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Jurisdiction Subgroup Draft Report for
> CCWG-Accountability Plenary Review
> All,
> One of the Subgroup members pointed out a minor editing error in the
> document.  On pages 13-14, there were several mentions of the RAA, when in
> fact the language quoted and discussed was from the ICANN Terms and
> Conditions for Registrar Accreditation Application.  (The reference was
> correct in the Executive Summary.)  This has now been fixed in the attached.
> Greg
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<
> mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>> wrote:
> All,
> Some minor formatting errors crept into the Report when it was converted
> from Word to PDF.  A new PDF of the report is attached. I've checked each
> page to confirm that the formatting errors were resolved.
> Thank you to Jorge Cancio for catching this problem!
> Greg
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:53 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<
> mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>> wrote:
> All,
> I am pleased to submit the Draft Report from the Jurisdiction Subgroup for
> consideration by the CCWG-Accountability Plenary.
> It is my understanding that a minority viewpoint is expected to be
> submitted.  In the interests of time, this will be submitted to the Plenary
> separately from the Draft Report.
> During the preparation of the OFAC Recommendation, the Subgroup considered
> an email where a registrar declined to do business with a potential
> reseller, based on the registrar’s policy of not doing business with people
> with Iranian passports.  The Subgroup also learned that this registrar,
> which had been registering domains for a number of Iranian nationals,
> refused to continue to do business with them.  The Subgroup has concluded
> that, to the extent these instances are related to OFAC, the concerns
> raised by these instances are adequately covered in the Recommendation
> already without any additional changes.  This is not in any way a comment
> on the validity of these particular concerns.  The Subgroup will consider
> creating "stress tests" based on these scenarios.
> I look forward to the Plenary's reading of the Draft Report.
> Best regards,
> Greg Shatan
> Rapporteur
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/rapha%C3%ABl-beauregard-lacroix-88733786/> -
@rbl0012 <https://twitter.com/rbl0112> - M: +33 7 86 39 18 15
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20171015/c287e840/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list