<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On Friday 30 December 2016 03:23 AM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.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)">
<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: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;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
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;}
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;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{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="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Parminder
said “</span>I havent seen not only no attempt to explore
ways to stop such influence by you, and many others here<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-alpha:100.0%"><span
style="color:windowtext">Translated, it means:</span></span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-color:#1F4E79;mso-style-textfill-fill-alpha:100.0%"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
name="_MailEndCompose"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">I just wanted to know what do you propose
to do about this clearly identified jurisdiction problem?
<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM:
First, it isn’t all that clearly identified. Other than
OFAC, we need to explore the scenarios, if any, in which
it might have impact.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
You say OFAC issue is clear but not others..<a
href="http://www.itforchange.net/sites/default/files/Jurisdiction%20of%20ICANN.pdf">
Others have listed</a> OFAC plus non OFAC issues, which are a lot
of groups. But lets say even with OFAC, what do you propose we do
about it? BTW, I am sure you know the following passage in the GTLD
handbook. It is clear that ICANN must and would comply with all US
laws, rules and regulations, be it OFAC, intellectual property
related, trade sanctions, FFC orders, any new laws not imagined till
now, the new hypothetical Trump Act,
whatever........................ Is this not an identification of a
problem enough? I see it as a clearly identified problem, on
solutions for whic hwe should be working, even without waiting for
responses to our proposed questionnaire. <br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 150%" align="left"><font
color="#000000"><font face="Arial, sans-serif"><font
style="font-size: 12pt" size="3">GTLD
Guidebook Version 2012-1-11 <br>
</font></font></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 150%" align="left"><font
color="#000000"><font face="Arial, sans-serif"><font
style="font-size: 12pt" size="3">Legal
Compliance -- ICANN must comply with all U.S. laws,
rules, and
regulations. One such set of regulations is the economic
and trade
sanctions program administered by the Office of Foreign
Assets
Control (OFAC) of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
These
sanctions have been imposed on certain countries, as
well as
individuals and entities that appear on OFAC's List of
Specially
Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (the SDN List).
ICANN is
prohibited from providing most goods or services to
residents of
sanctioned countries or their governmental entities or
to SDNs
without an applicable U.S. government authorization or
exemption.
ICANN generally will not seek a license to provide goods
or services
to an individual or entity on the SDN List. In the past,
when ICANN
has been requested to provide services to individuals or
entities
that are not SDNs, but are residents of sanctioned
countries, ICANN
has sought and been granted licenses as required. In any
given case,
however, OFAC could decide not to issue a requested
license.</font></font></font></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<title></title>
<meta name="generator" content="LibreOffice 4.2.8.2 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
p { margin-bottom: 0.25cm; line-height: 120% }
a:link { so-language: zxx }
-->
</style><br>
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">The
current Q4, as I have said, does a lousy job of this.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
Sure, but in all this long discussion you havent mentioned what kind
of question will do a non-lousy job. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span style="color:#1F497D">PS: </span>Further, if going
down an international treaty route is problematic for you,
do you think jurisdictional immunity under the International
Organisations Immunities Act is a good way to address this
jurisdictional problem?<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM:
International treaty would take decades, and given the
irrationality of inter-state rivalries, seems unlikely
ever to produce a good solution.
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
You have surely changed your views 180 degrees over the last 10
years, since when you had advocated, in 2005-06, for a governments
negotiated "Framework convention on the Internet". That is ok, but
others still do believe that the comity of nation states can achieve
much. I dont see your global network of private contracts take up
global governance, god forbid! <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM:
The IOIA isn’t all that promising, keep in mind that to
qualify as an “international organization” under that Act
the US Congress has to recognize the organization as such
and thus you would be bringing ICANN back under the
authority of the US congress, </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
This is just some cheap intellectual dishonesty (this is for calling
me "typically manipulative", in another email). Milton, are you
trying to tell us that if the CCWG recommends that ICANN be given
immunity under IOIA ONLY THEN would or can ICANN get subject to
Congress!!!! And you call yourself a professor of policy studies or
whatever!! The US congress can, if it so decides, right now eat
ICANN with breakfast, with no invitation required, from CCWG, from
the so called "Internet community", or from prof milton. What really
do you mean to say that seeking immunity under IOIA will "bring
ICANN back under the authority of the US congress"?? When did it go
out of authority of US congress? It must take extra-ordinary
intellectual dishonesty and disingenuity for a US prof of policy to
tell us that trying to seek immunity from US jurisdiction, even if
under a US law, will actually being ICANN "back under" US/
congress's authority/ jurisdiction.... <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">which
doesn’t seem so nice after the Republican takeover</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
As far as possible, I like not to talk about other countries'
democratic choices . But it is your (US's) problem really! Why we
should get thrown into this, who never voted this way or that--
majority of USians voted a particular way, and you are in a social
contract together, and so just accept it. But why should we, non
USiasn, have to go with what happens or does not happen to your
Congress. Milton/ others, are you guys left with no feeling of
democratic fraternity with the rest of the world at all - is this
the level that we are getting reduced to. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">
and our experiences last September. Indeed, the IOIA was
designed with state-based, diplomatic organizations in
mind – it applies to the UN, the Holy See and the European
Central Bank for example.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Now more than a dozen times I have given the example of
International Fertilizer Development Center, as a US non profit
under IOIA given immunity, and there are many others. Only yesterday
I linked the entire list of orgs under IOIA immunity, many of them
non IGOs. But you havent noticed it, yet, right. Try some
intellectual honesty, Milton, a term you throw around a lot. Do you
not see the hypocrisy here, but how can you, that would be a
contradiction in terms. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">
So your holding up of this option is what drives Corwin’s
sense that this debate is about whether ICANN turns into
an IGO.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Should I write it on stamp paper with notary authentication and post
it your home, that, no IOIA does not only give immunity to IGOs. It
has given imunity to many non IGos. If you do not have a good
argument dont just keep throwing around mis- representations. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">
Finally, the exemptions of the IOIA confer all kinds of
immunities on the organization that we might not want,
such as exemptions from property and income taxes (I know
you are a big fan of those)</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I thought ICANN is already exempted from income tax due to its non
profit status. But, then certainly I do not want it to be paying tax
to the US on income it makes from a global governance activity. Why
should it?<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">
and worse, immunity from lawsuits. Are you kidding me? You
want ICANN to be immune from lawsuits?</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
So, Milton, you havent till now realised that the jurisdiction issue
is about immunity from lawsuits, brought under the laws of one
country, to which the rest of the world does not contribute? Yes, we
do not want anyone to be able to challenge .ir or .africa, or a
hypothetical Indian generic drugs company owned .Sunpharma. under US
laws. Becuase these laws, and the US courts, apply the test of US
public interest, not, or certainly in priority to, that of global
Interest. All countries do it, there is no other way. That was
always the whole point.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BY2PR07MB16973E348EC71776F701D27A16B0@BY2PR07MB169.namprd07.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>