<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Courts do not enforce the law of a country. I doubt even criminal courts do that, Police and similar agencies are called Law Enforcement for a reason.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Courts adjudicate conflicts using the law of the land (mainly civil or common)</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">And at some stage (not reached yet in Sockpuppy's case) courts look at jurisdiction over the parties. If it has (having an office, doing business, ie having assets there) courts most certainly make orders. Which are easily enforced.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Courts do not like to make orders which can't be enforced but the .IR/.SY/.KR case is different, not only because of this peculiar US law which establishes jurisdiction. The defendants don't have assets readily available for seizure so the plaintiffs have to "search" for them.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">As far as jurisdiction goes, there are some 250 countries and if I were to order them, the US would not be on top but still high on the list.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">I also don't understand why you keep bringing this up.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">el<br><br>--&nbsp;<div>Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini 4</div></div><div><br>On 24 Jun 2016, at 17:55, parminder &lt;<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>&gt; wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
  
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  
  
    <br>
    <font color="#00afcd">[...]</font><br></div></blockquote><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>
    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.&nbsp; 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>
    <blockquote cite="mid:CA+aOHUS1vkh0ZKgRS_kP-gj=Qcth_VnCtgm5OfwsXD05b2gQEQ@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_default" 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.)&nbsp;</div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">The cases Rubens cites
          are disputes between private parties or between a private
          party and ICANN.&nbsp; The US court is the forum for those
          disputes.&nbsp; This is not "interference of the United States."</div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">If ICANN were located
          in another jurisdiction, that jurisdiction's courts would be
          hearing these disputes.&nbsp; Notably, ICANN is subject to being
          sued in other countries where it has offices, </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <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>
    <blockquote cite="mid:CA+aOHUS1vkh0ZKgRS_kP-gj=Qcth_VnCtgm5OfwsXD05b2gQEQ@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">so there are already
          alternatives if plaintiffs want to find a different venue in
          which to seek redress.&nbsp; While this is a possibility, I believe
          all plaintiffs that have sued ICANN have done so in the US.&nbsp;
          This may say something about the appeal of the US as a
          jurisdiction for resolving disputes.</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>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Rubens
          Kuhl <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:rubensk@nic.br" target="_blank">rubensk@nic.br</a>&gt;</span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div style="word-wrap:break-word"><span class=""><br>
                <div>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div>Em 22 de jun de 2016, à(s) 16:39:000, Phil
                      Corwin &lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com" target="_blank">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>&gt;
                      escreveu:</div>
                    <br>
                    <div>
                      <div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
                        <div style="margin:0in 0in
                          0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New
                          Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">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></div>
                        <div style="margin:0in 0in
                          0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New
                          Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">&nbsp;</span></div>
                        <div style="margin:0in 0in
                          0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New
                          Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">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></div>
                        <div style="margin:0in 0in
                          0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New
                          Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">&nbsp;</span></div>
                        <div style="margin:0in 0in
                          0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New
                          Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">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></div>
                        <div style="margin:0in 0in
                          0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:'Times New
                          Roman',serif"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">&nbsp;</span></div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                </div>
              </span>
              <div>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.&nbsp;</div>
              <span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>Rubens</div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                </font></span></div>
            <br>
            _______________________________________________<br>
            Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
            <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
            <a moz-do-not-send="true" 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>
            <br>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  

</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>