[CWG-RFP3] Is there is a more suitable legal jurisdiction for anIANA subsidiary?

Wed Nov 5 17:30:36 UTC 2014

I'm finding this conversation thread very frustrating.

If this is a topic being seriously considered - and it looks like it is.
And if none of us are in any way qualified to provide a cogent analysis -
which it looks like we aren't. Then surely the obvious solution is to find
someone, or some group, that can provide some answers to questions.

Based purely on human nature, I strongly suspect that the argument that
California is some how a special place for ICANN/IANA is more to do with it
being the status quo than any verifiable reality.

It is possible that IANA would be better placed in another jurisdiction -
although since we have failed to draw up any grounds by which that judgment
would be made, the whole conversation seems a little pointless.

It is equally possible that moving jurisdiction would have no real impact
at all.

One thing that I do see as a fact is that "California law" has been used
repeatedly to stymie recommended changes that the staff hasn't agreed with
or wanted to introduce. That is a problem.

If that is the problem we are seeking a solution to, it strikes me that the
conversation should focus on how to get independent analysis of decisions
that reference "California law" as a reason for a given direction rather
than embark on a discussion about jurisdictions overall.

Either way, let's take our jobs seriously and find some experts rather than
mistake familiarity with expertise.

Kieren

On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Allan MacGillivray <
allan.macgillivray at cira.ca> wrote:

>  Becky – I think that would be of considerable value.
>
>
>
> Allan
>
>
>
> *From:* cwg-rfp3-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-rfp3-bounces at icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Burr, Becky
> *Sent:* November-05-14 10:01 AM
> *To:* Becky Burr; Dwi Elfrida Martina
> *Cc:* RFP3
>
> *Subject:* Re: [CWG-RFP3] Is there is a more suitable legal jurisdiction
> for anIANA subsidiary?
>
>
>
> Team -
>
>
>
> Jurisdiction issues are very complex.  I believe that it would be
> extremely helpful for us (as well as for many other work streams) to
> develop a shared  perspective on the basic rules and issues.  Although
> there are many lawyers participating, we would probably get the most
> benefit from an independent/neutral provider.  If this is of interest, I
> would be happy to work with the co-chairs and other interested folks to put
> materials and a webinar together.
>
>
>
> J. Beckwith Burr
>
> *Neustar, Inc. /* Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
>
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
>
> Office: + 1.202.533.2932  Mobile:  +1.202.352.6367  /
> becky.burr at neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz
>
>
>
> *From: *<Burr>, Becky Burr <becky.burr at neustar.biz>
> *Date: *Wednesday, November 5, 2014 at 9:24 AM
> *To: *Dwi Elfrida Martina <dwi.elfrida at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *RFP3 <cwg-rfp3 at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [CWG-RFP3] Is there is a more suitable legal jurisdiction
> for anIANA subsidiary?
>
>
>
> Several independent review panels have held that ICANN is subject to
> international law.
>
>
>
>
>
> Becky Burr
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Nov 5, 2014, at 03:50, Dwi Elfrida Martina <dwi.elfrida at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>    Hi,
>
> my name is Dwi Elfrida, I am from Indonesia. in respond to optioned 2 from
> Robert, and thanks to bring the jurisdiction issue up, in my opinion to tie
> up IANA legal status to ICANN's legal status might a faster way to reach
> IANA's legislation. But, it wouldn't be solution for many parties who
> questioned IANA's independency from the US government authority, as I know,
> for some parties the good news (main spirit)  of  transition of IANA
> stewardship is to internationalized IANA, means to dismiss the image of
> single authority of the US government over IANA. Meanwhile, some parties
> are still debated the ICANN's legislation that cannot be counted as
> International law, as all cases of TLD (mostly gTLD) will be processed in
> the US by using the US law. Therefore, the government of France (at ICANN
> meeting in London) was still calling the issue of making ICANN as
> International organization legalized by International law. And this idea
> seems like supported by some governments in Europe, and other part of this
> world. Indeed, placing IANA's functions and office from the US to other
> part of this world, is not the solution as well, because it is not the
> matter or territory, but the matter of legislation system, which law that
> suitable enough to validate IANA? do we agree to use the US legislation
> system like has been used by the ICANN, or do we agree to use International
> law, then how will we make it happen? Our choice on IANA's legislation
> system will determine the law enforcement of IANA's policies in the future.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dwi
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> [image: Boxbe]
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.boxbe.com_overview&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=dwXKcyJyHjOeOvMCvWgkHIQUnNb53ULq_5GsKBtjdqM&e=>Greg
> Shatan (gregshatanipc at gmail.com) is not on your Guest List
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.boxbe.com_approved-2Dlist-3Ftc-5Fserial-3D19182912144-26tc-5Frand-3D1184408227-26utm-5Fsource-3Dstf-26utm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fcampaign-3DANNO-5FMWTP-26utm-5Fcontent-3D001-26token-3DqXEye5ECFs8sowPv0-252F4O8pOgVuL-252FBmLxktanSEOAIoHm3oce3A-252BGf6umfpPHJkCc-26key-3DhXVOG4roryQLXAw-252BAJXI90w8csVOeh5xYEclQYt0Qbk-253D&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=l0Hpa_joycqSp3Z7zfl75E-l1fPnGYe97BVXeJCeLdI&e=>
> | Approve sender
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.boxbe.com_anno-3Ftc-5Fserial-3D19182912144-26tc-5Frand-3D1184408227-26utm-5Fsource-3Dstf-26utm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fcampaign-3DANNO-5FMWTP-26utm-5Fcontent-3D001-26token-3DqXEye5ECFs8sowPv0-252F4O8pOgVuL-252FBmLxktanSEOAIoHm3oce3A-252BGf6umfpPHJkCc-26key-3DhXVOG4roryQLXAw-252BAJXI90w8csVOeh5xYEclQYt0Qbk-253D&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=DuwSLG5ar2V4oU67ZKkRXsAZXkWFaXvH6ogLhFbsl8U&e=>
> | Approve domain
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.boxbe.com_anno-3Ftc-5Fserial-3D19182912144-26tc-5Frand-3D1184408227-26utm-5Fsource-3Dstf-26utm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fcampaign-3DANNO-5FMWTP-26utm-5Fcontent-3D001-26dom-26token-3DqXEye5ECFs8sowPv0-252F4O8pOgVuL-252FBmLxktanSEOAIoHm3oce3A-252BGf6umfpPHJkCc-26key-3DhXVOG4roryQLXAw-252BAJXI90w8csVOeh5xYEclQYt0Qbk-253D&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=2jX-2mWyYFU7bmDZVRcEHQfGtVoCrA-zbiHakjXt0WM&e=>
>
>
>
> All:
>
>
>
> Here is Robert's second question (which I think also applies to the
> concept of a fully independent IANA):
>
>
>
>
>
> *For  option #2. - Is there is a  jurisdiction that ICANN has (or can
> obtain) legal status might be more suitable to use to create IANA as a
> subsidiary. Such an option might allow for the link to be a subsidiary of
> ICANN, but sever the legal link to the US. A negative, of course, would be
> moving the function and existing staff to a new part of the world.*
>
>
>
> Comments and discussion?
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
> Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_cwg-2Drfp3&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=dYjlRZKCFivOUjM8w-G3Ngmrm3uTYteQNcbUQCVgfQ0&e=>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dwi Elfrida MS
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
> Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_cwg-2Drfp3&d=AAICAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=dYjlRZKCFivOUjM8w-G3Ngmrm3uTYteQNcbUQCVgfQ0&e=
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
> Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-rfp3/attachments/20141105/2b0b26dc/attachment-0001.html>