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

Burr, Becky Becky.Burr at neustar.biz
Wed Nov 5 19:07:12 UTC 2014 

The group of organizations working on the NGO Accountability Charter in
the link Robert just sent around is very instructive:

ActionAid International,
Amnesty International
Caritas Internationalis
Care International 
CBM International 
CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation,
CORDAID 
European Environmental Bureau
Greenpeace International
Educo 
IRC (International Water & Sanitation Centre)
Oxfam International
Plan International 
Sightsavers International
SOS Kinderdorf International
The Forest Trust 
World Vision International
World YWCA 

These organizations may all be doing important work but - UNLIKE ICANN -
they are NOT regulating commercial behavior. If I don¹t like what
Greenpeace is doing, I won¹t make a contribution.  But I can¹t operate a
top level domain or sell registrations in .com without paying ICANN and
complying with the policies it imposes.  It seems fairly obvious to me
that ICANN should be held to a different accountability standard.

B


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






On 11/5/14, 12:43 PM, "Robert Guerra" <rguerra at privaterra.org> wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA512
>
>Kieren,
>
>Let me share two quick links that I was able to to find that could be
>of interest in regards providing more details about International
>Non-Governmental Organizations and what seems to be best practices
>that others are working on in regards to accountability.
>
>Links below..
>
>regards
>
>Robert
>
>European Convention on the Recognition of the Legal Personality of
>International Non-Governmental Organizations
>
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_the_Recognition_of_the
>_Legal_Personality_of_International_Non-Governmental_Organizations
>
>http://www.uia.org/archive/legal-status-4-11
>
>International Non-Governmental Organisations Accountability Charter
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Non-Governmental_Organisations_
>Accountability_Charter
>
>The International Non-Governmental Organisations Accountability
>Charter (INGO Accountability Charter) is a charter, founded in 2006 by
>a group of independent non-profit organisations, which is intended to
>foster accountability and transparency of non-governmental
>organisations, as well as stakeholder communication and performance.
>
>
>
>
>
>On 2014-11-05 12:30 PM, Kieren McCarthy wrote:
>> 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 <mailto: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>
>> [mailto: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 <tel:%2B%201.202.533.2932>  Mobile:
>> +1.202.352.6367 <tel:%2B1.202.352.6367>  / becky.burr at neustar.biz
>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz> / www.neustar.biz
>> <http://www.neustar.biz>____
>> 
>> __ __
>> 
>> *From: *<Burr>, Becky Burr <becky.burr at neustar.biz
>> <mailto:becky.burr at neustar.biz>> *Date: *Wednesday, November 5,
>> 2014 at 9:24 AM *To: *Dwi Elfrida Martina <dwi.elfrida at gmail.com
>> <mailto:dwi.elfrida at gmail.com>> *Cc: *RFP3 <cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
>> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>
>> wrote:____
>> 
>> Boxbe 
>> 
>><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.boxbe.com_overv
>>iew&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahO
>>P8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=dwXKcyJyHjOeOv
>>MCvWgkHIQUnNb53ULq_5GsKBtjdqM&e=>Greg
>>
>> 
>Shatan (gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>) is not on your Guest List
>> 
>><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.boxbe.com_appro
>>ved-2Dlist-3Ftc-5Fserial-3D19182912144-26tc-5Frand-3D1184408227-26utm-5Fs
>>ource-3Dstf-26utm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fcampaign-3DANNO-5FMWTP-26utm-5
>>Fcontent-3D001-26token-3DqXEye5ECFs8sowPv0-252F4O8pOgVuL-252FBmLxktanSEOA
>>IoHm3oce3A-252BGf6umfpPHJkCc-26key-3DhXVOG4roryQLXAw-252BAJXI90w8csVOeh5x
>>YEclQYt0Qbk-253D&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8M
>>o8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=l
>>0Hpa_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-3D
>>001-26token-3DqXEye5ECFs8sowPv0-252F4O8pOgVuL-252FBmLxktanSEOAIoHm3oce3A-
>>252BGf6umfpPHJkCc-26key-3DhXVOG4roryQLXAw-252BAJXI90w8csVOeh5xYEclQYt0Qbk
>>-253D&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYa
>>hOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=DuwSLG5ar2V4
>>oU67ZKkRXsAZXkWFaXvH6ogLhFbsl8U&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-3D
>>001-26dom-26token-3DqXEye5ECFs8sowPv0-252F4O8pOgVuL-252FBmLxktanSEOAIoHm3
>>oce3A-252BGf6umfpPHJkCc-26key-3DhXVOG4roryQLXAw-252BAJXI90w8csVOeh5xYEclQ
>>Yt0Qbk-253D&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjD
>>mrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA&s=2jX-2m
>>WyYFU7bmDZVRcEHQfGtVoCrA-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 <mailto: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_mailma
>>n_listinfo_cwg-2Drfp3&d=AAMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GR
>>laq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8e
>>A&s=dYjlRZKCFivOUjM8w-G3Ngmrm3uTYteQNcbUQCVgfQ0&e=>____
>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- ____
>> 
>> Dwi Elfrida MS____
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ Cwg-rfp3 mailing
>> list Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org <mailto: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_GRl
>>aq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=k2GsV6WE92A31X-8yWSy_xDHzzCQkZmNP4-qSd-m8eA
>>&s=dYjlRZKCFivOUjM8w-G3Ngmrm3uTYteQNcbUQCVgfQ0&e=____
>>
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ Cwg-rfp3 mailing
>> list Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org <mailto:Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ Cwg-rfp3 mailing
>> list Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3
>> 
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJUWmHTAAoJECGvm3vMAIQDFUMH+gIC9mtMuql349wqMqmj3+6X
>gnYX7odkyaa9Tq+nvRhc/xwTLISWASXbqrauj19bagSwfdaAVBEo+AaI2ZVu+S/w
>chgYOYGwoAHHg6eyV9s1GyWNTO0pZd1EDDoNuZ0oa7DqGn0Uemu1u6WnD5eR1ojm
>Qwh4pa4eURVd4puWJF9hjyGbvUC2Qfopa8bE/hLV2gg8+/mL92MHjWgj6cAkkAkt
>2JnpJy3AXFaoFvHArtGTy2HG/+iJKxmbQ8CbE6lNUzRETLAo4vfj/8piiRJtxD1f
>jLQcIuThaEFUX2BMdH0SozP6ZUP5FFPIWufh6jrWfePDykWzIi2WqSuV1csScco=
>=ao4l
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>_______________________________________________
>Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
>Cwg-rfp3 at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3

More information about the Cwg-rfp3 mailing list