[CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-jurisdiction] Jurisdiction Subgroup. Draft Report. Statement of Brazil. Annex. To be annexed to the draft report. For consideration by the CCWG.

parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Sun Oct 15 18:21:58 UTC 2017

Dear All

I fully support the excellent "statement of Brazil", which makes the
required point very well. The sub-group should consider the draft
recommendations made in the statement. In default, the CCWG should
directly consider them.

My own dissenting opinion is enclosed. It is in two parts, part 1 is
about what was the group's mandate to do but it failed to do. This part
first expresses support to Brazil's statement, and then makes additional
points, detailing how there has been a miscarriage of due process, and
thus justifying why Brazil's draft recs must be considered, in the
required elaborate manner. Part one is enclosed herewith.

Part two will present  some comments on and disagreements with regard to
the two sets of draft recs that have been submitted on the sub-group's
behalf. I am still to write them, so allow me to submit them in the next
12 hours, which will still be the weekend in some parts of the world,
and thus within the deadline I hope.

Best regards, parminder

On Sunday 15 October 2017 06:43 AM, Thiago Braz Jardim Oliveira wrote:
> 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/
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20171015/a2ade827/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Dissenting view on draft recs.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 73811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20171015/a2ade827/Dissentingviewondraftrecs-0001.pdf>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list