<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Grec</div><div>I fully agree with you in your snalysis of what " applicable law" means</div><div>However, since ICANN also take actions outside US or its action /inaction could have bearing on other States to which those actions may impact, then the applicable law on those countries are relevant should the case under consideration has any impact/ bearing in those States due to the fact that yo deal with a case that involve country "a"one can not legally apply any law other than the law applicable in county"a"</div><div>Regards</div><div>Kavouss <br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On 1 Feb 2016, at 07:50, Greg Shatan <<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Bruce,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">The term "applicable law" shows up in many different types of US legal documents. I am sure there are legal opinions, regulations and other sources that can provide a formal legal understanding of that. I'm sure our counsel would be happy to prepare a memo on "applicable law" if we want one. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I'll just speak from the experience gained in 28 years of practicing law in the US. I have always understood it to mean all of the laws that apply to a particular entity or to a particular transaction. I have always understood "laws" to refer to laws made by governmental authorities. I'm quite confident that the other attorneys working on these matters, and their clients, had the same understanding. I'd go so far as to say that this is understanding is the common legal understanding.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">This would mean that ICANN, at a minimum is subject to US federal law, California state law and also to any local laws in Los Angeles. (No matter where you are in the US, you are always subject to US federal law, the arguments of some armed occupiers in Oregon notwithstanding.)</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I don't think we have any latitude whatsoever to declare that "applicable laws" in the ICANN Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws refers to the ICANN Bylaws. I have not seen "laws" construed to include corporate bylaws, much less be limited to corporate bylaws. This line of thinking should be discarded as unsupportable.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">There are certainly US federal, state and local laws that protect human rights, starting with the US Constitution. (I tend to suspect that California has more such laws at the state and local laws than most other states.) Federal, California and Los Angeles laws that protect human rights would obviously apply to ICANN. I believe our counsel has given us a few examples of such laws and I'm sure a long list could be made -- wage and hour laws, privacy laws, laws against unlawful imprisonment, etc., etc.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"> </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"> <br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Bruce Tonkin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au" target="_blank">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">>> My problem with "applicable law" is that Human Rights are fundamental, whereas laws differ from country to country. And Human Rights can not be "diminished", for the lack of a better word, by the laws of a country.<br>
<br>
>> So, if "applicable law" mean the Bylaws and not the law of any country or countries, lets's put this in, if only for avoidance of doubt.<br>
<br>
</span>I would also expect that ICANN is already subject to "applicable" national laws - whether or not they are in the bylaws.<br>
<br>
So a bylaw that states that ICANN is subject to applicable laws seems somewhat redundant.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
Regards,<br>
Bruce Tonkin<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>