<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On Thursday 29 December 2016 10:33 AM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:SN2PR0701MB7337B8719EC1C1B3041D7A6A16B0@SN2PR0701MB733.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Garamond;
panose-1:2 2 4 4 3 3 1 1 8 3;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
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;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
p.msochpdefault, li.msochpdefault, div.msochpdefault
{mso-style-name:msochpdefault;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:normal;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.msopapdefault, li.msopapdefault, div.msopapdefault
{mso-style-name:msopapdefault;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Let me correct
Pedro and Philip.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">At least in its
English version, there is NO call for “internationalization
of ICANN” in the Netmundial statement. There is a call for
“globalization” of ICANN:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">6. It is expected that the process of
globalization of ICANN speeds up leading to a truly
international and global organization serving the public
interest with clearly implementable and verifiable
accountability and transparency mechanisms that satisfy
requirements from both internal stakeholders and the global
community.<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:#1F497D">True, the
final statement refers to a “truly international and
global organization” in additional to a call for
globalization, and the conjunction of “international” and
“global” was probably some kind of compromise reached
between the likes of Pedro and myself. <o:p>
</o:p></span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">But note that
the Montevideo Statement, which preceded the Netmundial
statement, also called for globalization of IANA. The idea
of globalization is distinct from internationalization in
that it implies a jurisdiction that does not involve
national borders at all</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Milton, since you seem to so very clear about everything, and on a
crusade to correct everyone's confusions, can you give us an example
of such "jurisdiction that does not involve national borders at
all", without it implying an agreement reached among states. Are you
promoting US jurisdiction as such jurisdiction without borders?<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:SN2PR0701MB7337B8719EC1C1B3041D7A6A16B0@SN2PR0701MB733.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> (appropriate
for the internet), whereas internationalization implies an
agreement reached among states. Those of us paying
attention before and during Netmundial always insisted on
globalization rather than internationalization as the word
of choice. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal">
<b>From:</b>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Phil Corwin<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, December 27, 2016 10:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br"><pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br></a>; parminder
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><parminder@itforchange.net></a>; Kavouss Arasteh
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com"><kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com></a>; Greg Shatan
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com"><gregshatanipc@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] RES: Jurisdiction
Proposed Questions and Poll Results<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">"</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Let
me emphasize, by the way, that the NETmundial Statement
calls for ICANN´s internationalization and not for it to
become an intergovernmental organization. Those are two
different notions that should not be confounded."</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Can
you please cite any example of an "internationalized"
organization that is not an IGO and, if such
example(s) exists, cite the jurisdiction in which it
is organized and whose laws it is subject to. Thank
you.</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">Philip
S. Corwin, Founding Principal</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">Virtualaw
LLC</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">1155
F Street, NW</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">Suite
1050</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">Washington,
DC 20004</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">202-559-8597/Direct</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">202-559-8750/Fax</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">202-255-6172/cell</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><strong><i><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:navy">"Luck
is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey</span></i></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin-bottom:10.0pt">
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center"
align="center">
<span style="color:black">
<hr align="center" size="5" width="100%">
</span></div>
</div>
<div id="divRpF429678">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">
</span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
on behalf of Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br">pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 24, 2016 9:53 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> parminder; Kavouss Arasteh; Greg Shatan<br>
<b>Cc:</b> </span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [CCWG-ACCT] RES: Jurisdiction
Proposed Questions and Poll Results</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Dear
CCWG-colleagues,</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:13.5pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">After
reading some comments in this email thread, I
must admit to be really disappointed.<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
Some of our colleagues in the CCWG seem to
have forgotten - perhaps on purpose - that the
topic of jurisdiction was allocated to WS2 as
a result of a postponement, since the majority
of this group thought it was not appropriate
to deal with it in the pre-transition period
due to time constraints. My government was
not in favor of postponing the discussion on
jurisdiction, as we consider it was – and
remains – a fundamental aspect of a new ICANN
truly governed by the multistakeholder
community without any pre-conditions, but in
respect to the viewpoint of the other
colleagues, we agreed to move it to WS2.
<br>
<br>
Now that time has come to properly deal with
this topic, it is quite frustrating to notice
that some participants insist on limiting
and/or procrastinating this debate, including
by using the absurd argument that any
discussion around jurisdiction cannot put into
question any aspect already decided in WS1,
which is embedded in the California law. We
cannot see good faith in that kind of circular
argument.
</span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span
style="font-size:13.5pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">In
our view, the discussion around the inclusion
or exclusion of Q.4 shows quite clearly that
some of those who have fiercely objected to
any jurisdiction debate during WS1 are
maintaining their objection in WS2 as
well. On that particular topic (Q.4) we concur
with the view that upon deciding on
institutional arrangements we should not only
consider already occurred cases but also take
into account logically strong possibilities.
The responses to the questionnaire should thus
help us to deal with all possibilities
associate to jurisdiction. In case any
unsubstantiated opinion will be received, it
should be summarily discarded.
<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">From the
various jurisdiction calls it became quite
evident that a substantial part of the
subgroup - mainly non-US - has great interest
in examining and debating ways through which
we can make sure that any issue associated to
jurisdiction be addressed in a way compatible
with the company's international remit of
coordinating Internet public identifiers. In
that context, I would like to highlight my
government´s understanding that although the
proposed questionnaire under discussion may
provide us with some relevant factual
information, it does not in any way cover all
aspects of interest. We would like to refer,
for example, to the list of issues compiled by
Kavouss Arasteh as per his 13 December 2016
e-mail. We would also refer to questions that
have continuously been asked by Parminder,
apparently without any satisfactory answer.
Those issues and questions include, for
example, dispute settlement related topics,
which demonstrates, in our view, that
jurisdiction cannot be seen purely from
businesses´ viewpoint. As someone has stated,
we also need to look at the relationship
between ICANN and third parties and adequately
consider non-contracted Parties that might be
affected by ICANN´s acts and/or omissions. </span>
<span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">From the
perspective of the Brazilian government, the
topics raised by Kavouss, Parminder and others
are issues of particular interest which,
needless to say, will not be adequately
addressed through the mere analysis of the
answers provided to the questionnaire, whether
it includes Q.4 or not.</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"> My
government has expressed its interest in
pursuing discussion on jurisdiction through
those angles many times – both during the
IANA transition process and well before that.
Other governments have done the same, as well
as a sound number of civil society
organizations around the globe. The
"NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement", while
calling for the internationalization of ICANN,
clearly expresses this as well. Let me
emphasize, by the way, that the NETmundial
Statement calls for ICANN´s
internationalization and not for it to become
an intergovernmental organization. Those are
two different notions that should not be
confounded.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<br>
If this subgroup fails to deal with the
multidimensional issues associated to
jurisdiction properly , it may be applauded
by some segments , but it will not contribute
to putting in place a framework that will
ensure the shared goal of making ICANN a
legitimate entity in the eyes of all
stakeholders, including governments. To
achieve that, no issues should be discarded as
"non important" or "not yet verified". While
preserving the essence of what was achieved in
WS1, innovative thinking, including on the
part of persons with legal expertise, will be
needed. Is it worth to wipe an important
debate under the carpet just to comfort one or
a few stakeholder groups while discontenting
others? What kind of legitimacy is such a
biased and limited exercise likely to have
within the international community? .<br>
<br>
It is time the subgroup - including the
coChairs - make a honest assessment of the
various viewpoints related to ICANN's
jurisdiction and conduct the debate as openly
as possible in order to address all the
concerns and interests behind it. </span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Kind
regards,</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Sec.
Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva </span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Division
of Information Society</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Ministry
of Foreign Affairs - Brazil</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">T:
+55 61 2030-6609</span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="margin-bottom:10.0pt">
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center"
align="center">
<span style="color:black">
<hr align="center" size="5" width="100%">
</span></div>
</div>
<div id="divRpF977723">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">De:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">
</span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black">
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>] em nome de parminder
[<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>]<br>
<b>Enviado:</b> quinta-feira, 22 de
dezembro de 2016 14:01<br>
<b>Para:</b> Kavouss Arasteh; Greg Shatan<br>
<b>Cc:</b> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a></span></a><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
<b>Assunto:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT]
Jurisdiction Proposed Questions and Poll
Results</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Dear
Kavouss</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">You
are right, we should first deal with the
issue of the questionnaire.
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">I
agree, as do many others, that there is no
justification to remove the proposed Q 4
from the questionnaire. The question must
go out along with others.</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">A
question seeking information is only a
question seeking information. People may
chose to not respond to it, or give
different responses, likely in opposition
to one another. That is all very fine, and
quite expected. But such forceful
arguments to not ask for certain kinds of
information is very disturbing, even
alarming. (I have issues with how the
other questions are framed, but I am fine
to let them go out because some people
want them to be posed.)</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black">Ordinarily,
if a good number of participants here
wanted a question, that should be enough
to include it. Here, a majority of those
who voted on the issue of this particular
question wanted the question included.
That should have conclusively stopped the
debate. But no, not so. There is
persistent effort to censor this question.
And this in a process that is advertised
as open, transparent, collaborative, and
what not. There is something very
basically wrong here. </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black">parminder <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">On Thursday 22
December 2016 07:20 PM, Kavouss Arasteh
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Dear John.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Dear Parminder,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">It is difficult
for me to conclude on any solution
between the lines of your
discussion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Could any of you
kindly give a resume of the
exchanged views.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">We need to look
for some compromise solution knowing
that some hard liners like x and y
insist to impose their objections to
send Q4.I continue to object to all
questions until all 4 are agreed<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Nothing is
agreed untill everything is agreed<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">this is a
Global multistakholder Group
discussion and NOT North American
Sub-Region multistakholder Group
dominated by certain individuals<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">Kavouss <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">2016-12-22 13:06
GMT+01:00 parminder <</span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a></a><span
style="color:black">>:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid
#CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">On Tuesday
20 December 2016 08:37 PM,
John Laprise wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
name="m_-6062255183317377725__MailEndCompose">“</a>To
turn ones face away and say,
nothing can be done here, to
evolve our democratic
international systems, is to
vote for a status quo which
serves some, but not others.”<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Rather,
it is an acknowledgement of
reality.
<span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
Apologies for appearing to be
flippant, but isnt that what
every status quo-ist says.
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Rule
of law is neither globally
strong nor evenly distributed.
I can imagine a world in which
the way forward you describe
is plausible but, regrettably,
it is not the one we live in.
Other systems need
strengthening and in some
cases even existence before
the way forward is open. It’s
not a vote for the status quo
but a recognition of path
dependency.
<span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
I am not asking for a violent
deviation from the path - both
options that I propose, a new
international law and immunity
under existing US Act carries
forward the path-dependency, and
completely safeguard the
existing structures and
processes of ICANN, the system I
think you allude to as requiring
strengthening. What I propose in
fact further strengthens it, to
a considerable extent. The ICANN
system's current jurisdictional
oversight by a single country is
its biggest weak point in terms
of international legitimacy. ( A
point, unfortunately USians here
seem not able to see and
sympathise with.) Imagine an
ICANN with immunity from US
jurisdiction; how much
legitimacy, and thus strength,
it adds to the system.<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thanks
for the back rounder
Parminder. It was, along with
some parallel research, quite
helpful.<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
Thanks John, you are welcome. <br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
problem remains however that
there is no analogous
organization to ICANN merely
in terms of its contractual
authority.<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
Firstly, if we are hoping that a
fully-developed, well-rounded
solution, with everything fully
covered by enough exact
precedents, to this complex but
very genuine problem, will
simply one day drop in our laps,
I assure you that this is not
going to happen. We have to work
for it, join the dots, take
risks, make innovations, and so
on. The point is, who is losing
and gaining what from the
present dispensation, and who is
willing to do what is required
to do.
<br>
<br>
Next, I see that organisations
like International Fertilizer
and Development Centre, which we
cited as an example of an NPO
given jurisdictional immunity,
also does run many projects
worldwide. Any such project
would require use of a legal
status, entering contracts, and
so on.... We just need to look
into it. But if we close our
eyes, and simply refuse to
explore options, we are not
going to get anywhere. I am not
saying this example will be an
exact fit for our requirement,
but we need to see what is
possible, and innovate and
evolve over it. <br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I’d
also add that many of the
benefits of the act are at the
discretion of the US Secretary
of State and can be revoked.<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
Yes, which is why immunity under
US Act is less sustainable
option than international law
based immunity. But still better
than the present condition. In
the</span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.itforchange.net/sites/default/files/Jurisdiction%20of%20ICANN.pdf"
target="_blank"> recent civil
society statement on
jurisdiction</a><span
style="color:black">, we also
suggested a method whereby any
such withdrawal of immunity can
be made difficult/ ineffectual
(see option 3 in the end).
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
proposed jurisdictional
immunity would also require
all governments to sign off on
such status, given ICANN’s
reach.<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
I dont see why so. Only US gov
needs to agree. <br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
know that there is a
significant literature on
international compacts and
law. Given the often decades
long time frames for the
passage and acceptance of such
law, the Internet as we know
it is unlikely to exist by the
time it comes into force. <span
style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
These are weak excuses. It can
be done in 6 months. But in any
case, if it satisfies those who
want to move towards
international jurisdiction, what
do you lose in allowing to set
in motion the process, esp if
you think it would take forever
to do anything. Let those who
want have it. In the interim,
status quo would stay.<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">To
your question about why we do
not discuss jurisdictional
immunity under US law: it is
because the domestic political
reality of the situation makes
such an eventuality so remote
as to be hypothetical. <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
The same domestic situation
makes the continuation of ICANN
under US jurisdiction even less
tenable.
<br>
<br>
This brings me to a very
important point: the job of
CCWG, working on behalf of the
global community, is not to
second guess what US gov will
accept or not (unfortunately,
that is what it has mostly
done). If this was its real
task, we as well may let US gov
do what it may, instead of
providing them the cover of
legitimacy of the supposed will
of the so called 'global
community' which is what this
process does. Our job is to
recommend what we think in is
best global interest, and is
ordinarily plausible to do. This
is what our job is, and we must
just do that. Let US gov do its
job - accept our recs or not.
That burden is upon them - let s
not take up their burden. This
aspect of the work of the
"community" groups involved in
the transition process has
always greatly bothered me. We
must have clarity about - on
whose behalf are we working (i
think, for the global community,
but you can clarify) and what
our recs must be based on (I
think, on our understanding of
what is best for the global
community, and not what we think
US gov likes and would agree to,
and what not, but again you can
clarify)<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
described quest is admirable
but IMO is a non-starter.
Conditions do not exist
presently to make it a
possible.<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
We are part of once in decades
constitutional process about
ICANN's structures. If it is not
now, it is never.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black"><br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif">Best regards,
</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"> </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Garamond",serif">John
Laprise, Ph.D.</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif">Consulting Scholar</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"> </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/" target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/">http://www.linkedin.com/in/</a></a><span
style="color:black">jplaprise/<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"> </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"> </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div
style="border:none;border-top:solid
windowtext
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in
0in
0in;border-color:currentColor
currentColor">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
parminder [<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange" target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange">mailto:parminder@itforchange</a></a>.net]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday,
December 20, 2016 2:57
AM<br>
<b>To:</b> John
Laprise <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jlaprise@gmail.com" target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jlaprise@gmail.com"><jlaprise@gmail.com></a></a>;
<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re:
[CCWG-ACCT]
Jurisdiction Proposed
Questions and Poll
Results<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="color:black">On
Monday 19 December 2016
08:14 PM, John Laprise
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Possibilities
of jurisdictional
immunity? Could you
please provide examples
of organizations that
enjoy such.<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="color:black"><br>
John<br>
The most well known case
of jurisdictional
immunity is of course
for organisations
incorporated under
international law.
Unlike what has been
argued here variously,
although international
law has to be made by
governments through
treaties etc that says
nothing about the actual
governance structure of
the concerned
organisation, ICANN in
this case. International
law can, to take an
extreme case, hand over
complete governance of a
body created/
incorporated under
international law to you
and me... Nothing
circumscribes how
international law is
written as long as all
countries agree to it.
It is entirely possible,
and I think extremely
plausible, that they
would agree to write in
such law the exact
governance structure of
ICANN as it is at
present. Right now too,
ICANN exists by and
under the strength of
its law of incorporation
which is US law. In the
scenario I present, it
would just be
international law
instead of US law. Yes,
there are matters to
worked out in this
regard, but if democracy
and self-determination
of all people, equally,
is of any importance at
all, we can go through
the process, including
doing the needed
innovations as needed.
The current
international system was
not handed over to us by
God, it was evolved by
people like us, who
responded appropriately
to newer and newer
global challenges, as
the one that faces us
now. To turn ones face
away and say, nothing
can be done here, to
evolve our democratic
international systems,
is to vote for a status
quo which serves some,
but not others. And
these are the others
that are protesting
here, and seeking
appropriate change. It
is a political issue,
lets not treat it as a
technical issue, of what
is argued to be
difficult or too
"troublesome" to pursue.
<br>
<br>
Next, even without going
the international law
route, as has been said
many times earlier here,
US law allows even non
profits to be given
jurisdictional immunity.
The concerned law is the
</span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/annex9.pdf"
target="_blank">United
States International
Organisations Immunities
Act</a><span
style="color:black"> .
And an example of a US
non-profit being given
jurisdiction immunity
under it is</span><em><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black;font-style:normal">
International
Fertilizer and
Development Center. </span></em><span
style="color:black">This
has been discussed in a
report commissioned by
ICANN itself which can
be found at
</span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/corell-24aug06.html"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/corell-24aug06.html">https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/corell-24aug06.html</a></a><span
style="color:black"> .
<br>
<br>
I have been unable to
understand why can we
not agree to even
jurisdictional immunity
under existing US law,
which keeps ICANN in the
US, preserves its
existing structures, and
does go considerable way
to address the concerns
about those who are
concerned about
application of US public
law on ICANN, and what
it may mean for its
global governance work.
<br>
<br>
The argument is advanced
that this may affect the
operation of the newly
instituted community
accountability
mechanism. I dont think
this is not true. This
mechanism is a matter of
internal ICANN
governance system, which
is a 'private'
arrangement with choice
of law available to it.
It simply has to be put
in ICANN bylaws that
ICANN governance
processes will be
subject to adjudication
by Californian courts as
present. That should do.
Of course the mentioned
International Fertilizer
and Development Centre
also must be existing
with some governance
systems, that admit of
external adjudication,
even as it enjoys the
benefit of
jurisdictional immunity
from US public laws.
Such immunity always
only pertains to the
policy and such
international core
activities of the
concerned organisation,
and associated matters.
It would not, for
instance, extend to
actual crime being
committed by its
personnel on its
premises. All such
matters of various
distinctions get taken
care of when we enter
the actual processes of
such immunities etc.
Right now, the issue is
only to decide to go
down the route, or not.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif">Best regards,
</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"> </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Garamond",serif">John
Laprise, Ph.D.</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif">Consulting Scholar</span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"> </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/jplaprise/"
target="_blank"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/jplaprise/">http://www.linkedin.com/in/jplaprise/</a></span></a><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"> </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-family:"Garamond",serif"> </span><span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div
style="border:none;border-top:solid
windowtext
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt
0in 0in
0in;border-color:currentColor
currentColor">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a></a> [<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a></a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>parminder<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday,
December 19, 2016
7:10 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re:
[CCWG-ACCT]
Jurisdiction
Proposed Questions
and Poll Results<span
style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span
style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:black">On
Saturday 17 December
2016 12:40 AM,
Mueller, Milton L
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<pre><span style="color:black">SNIP <o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">John Laprise's wording was much, much better: <o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">"What are the advantages or disadvantages, if any, relating to changing ICANN’s jurisdiction*, particularly with regard to the actual operation of ICANN’s policies and accountability mechanisms?"<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="color:black"><br>
This formulation does
not include
possibilities of
jurisdictional
immunity. <br>
<br>
Something like <br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre><span style="color:black">"What are the advantages or disadvantages, if any, relating to changing ICANN’s jurisdiction*, <b><i>or providing possible jurisdictional immunity,</i></b> particularly with regard to the actual operation of ICANN’s policies and accountability mechanisms?"<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="color:black"><br>
would be better.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<pre><span style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span style="color:black">Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="color:black">_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list
</span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org"
target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><span
style="color:black">
</span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community"
target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><span
style="color:black">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center;line-height:normal"
align="center">
<span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif;color:black">
<hr style="color:#A0A0A0" align="center"
noshade="noshade" size="1" width="100%">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;line-height:normal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif;color:black">No virus found
in this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - </span><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.avg.com" target="_blank"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif">www.avg.com</span></a><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif;color:black"><br>
Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4739/13633
- Release Date: 12/22/16<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</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>
</body>
</html>