<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
span.hoenzb
{mso-style-name:hoenzb;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>“</span>Courts do not enforce plaintiff’s will, *they enforce the law of the US*. A plaintiff's appeal is just the trigger or the proximate cause. This is quite basic. Not sure why we are discussing such basic factual stuff, and are confused about them.”<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I guess we discuss them because some people are in fact confused about them. This is a good example – US courts (like many others around the globe) often apply the laws of foreign jurisdictions and not the laws of the United States to disputes. So the basic answer is that the courts adjudicate the laws as directed … by statute or by the parties. Here in the US, for example, we often apply English law; we apply admiralty law of nations; and I have personally participated as a representative in a dispute in which the principal question involved the laws of Germany. We apply these laws to disputes because the contract between the parties so directs. If ICANN said in its registry contracts (for example) that the suit would be heard in US courts but that the law of Switzerland would apply the US courts would honor that designation. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>ICANN indeed is free to designate ANY venue in the globe and ANY applicable substantive law it wishes for its contractual disputes and the US courts would enforce those contracts. Despite your contention otherwise, the only aspect of US law that cannot be contractually derogated from because of ICANN’s incorporation in California is the California law regarding the formation and operation of corporations.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Paul<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Paul<span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>Paul Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com"><span style='color:#0563C1'>paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>O: +1 (202) 547-0660<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>M: +1 (202) 329-9650<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><a href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/"><span style='color:#0563C1'>www.redbranchconsulting.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>My PGP Key: <a href="http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/"><span style='color:#0563C1'>http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/</span></a> </span><u><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#0563C1'><o:p></o:p></span></u></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext'> accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>parminder<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, June 24, 2016 11:55 AM<br><b>To:</b> accountability-cross-community@icann.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] premature jurisdiction debates<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Thursday 23 June 2016 02:00 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>Lawsuits in US courts are not "interference of the United States," unless the United States is the plaintiff. In the US, courts are limited to hearing disputes between private parties. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><br>Courts do not enforce plaintiff’s will, *they enforce the law of the US*. A plaintiff's appeal is just the trigger or the proximate cause. This is quite basic. Not sure why we are discussing such basic factual stuff, and are confused about them. Just because they help a case for sticking to US jurisdiction!? Bec if somehow law can be proved to be neutral, technical, kind of thing, then one can pursue the argument that it doesnt matter which one is employed.<br><br>Law is something that comes from the 'will of the people' of a particular nation and is therefore legitimately specific to it, and is illegitimate to apply to others. Tweaking the famous call from US independence struggle "no taxation without representation" to "no legislation without representation". Taxation is after also a law, and its enforcement. If freedom and self- representation was important to the US centuries ago, and hopefully still is, please give some consideration to the rest of the world too. A humble appeal.<br><br>A comment below on another regularly expressed confusion ...<br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>The US courts do not (as in some jurisdictions) have any proactive, prosecutorial or investigative powers. (In limited circumstances, in the context of an actual litigation, the court can appoint experts, but that's about as far as that goes.) <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>The cases Rubens cites are disputes between private parties or between a private party and ICANN. The US court is the forum for those disputes. This is not "interference of the United States."<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>If ICANN were located in another jurisdiction, that jurisdiction's courts would be hearing these disputes. Notably, ICANN is subject to being sued in other countries where it has offices, <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><br>It is only useful to sue an organisation in a country whose judicial authorities can enforce their decisions over that organisation, as US courts can over ICANN as a US registered body. It is vain to and meaningless to sue it elsewhere. Most courts outside would even refuse to take on the case pointing to the pointlessness of it....<br><br>BTW, if it was the same about suing it wherever ICANN was, why then not let it be in a non US location... Why is US and the USians so keen to keep it in the US, so much so that the jurisdiction issue even suddenly disappears from the agenda of the workstream 2, only to make an reappearance bec Brazil gov is too strong a party to be treated lightly :)<br><br>parminder <br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>so there are already alternatives if plaintiffs want to find a different venue in which to seek redress. While this is a possibility, I believe all plaintiffs that have sued ICANN have done so in the US. This may say something about the appeal of the US as a jurisdiction for resolving disputes.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>Greg<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Rubens Kuhl <<a href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br" target="_blank">rubensk@nic.br</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>Em 22 de jun de 2016, à(s) 16:39:000, Phil Corwin <<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com" target="_blank">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>> escreveu:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>So long as we have a common understanding of what would constitute “interference by the U.S. government” (of which there has been little to none since ICANN’s inception, with the possible exception of the delay in .xxx delegation to the root). I presume you are advocating deciding upon a process to address such an occurrence, rather than making a decision now about an alternate jurisdiction for a situation that may never arise, or occur decades from now.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>I’ll start that discussion by stating that it would likely include interference in ICANN’s policymaking process (outside of advocacy within the GAC) or trying to block or compel a change in the root zone, through methods that are inconsistent with the Bylaws.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>I don’t think it should include private litigation brought against ICANN and heard in state or federal court; or law enforcement actions, such as bringing an antitrust action if there is an allegation of illicit pricing decisions, or criminal charges against an ICANN employee for embezzlement, etc.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>There is already litigation in California and federal courts that would compel changes in the root zone, like the litigation against the ccTLDs of Syria and Iran, or the current .africa litigation... so this interference of the US legal system within ICANN policy making process is already happening in some cases or imminent in others. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'>Rubens<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#888888'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><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" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>