[Ws2-jurisdiction] Third Draft of Experience Solicitation Questions

[Greg Shatan]

Here's a slight change to the footnote (also made in the footnote to the
proposed additional question).

*Fourth Formulation -- Second Draft*

What are the advantages or disadvantages, if any, relating to ICANN's
jurisdiction*, particularly with regard to the actual operation of ICANN’s
policies and accountability mechanisms?

Please support your response with appropriate examples, references to
specific laws, case studies, other studies, and analysis.  In particular,
please indicate if there are current or past instances that highlight such
advantages or problems.  In terms of likely future risk, please mention
specific ways in which U.S. or California laws safeguard or interfere with,
or may be used to safeguard or interfere with, ICANN's ability to carry out
its policies throughout the world.

For any disadvantage identified, please identify alternatives (including
other jurisdictions), if any, where that problem would not occur.  For each
such jurisdiction or other alternative, please specify whether and how it
would support the outcomes of CCWG-Accountability Work Stream 1, identify
the risks of those jurisdictions or other alternatives, and discuss the
risks associated with changing from the current situation.

_________________

*  For these questions, “ICANN’s jurisdiction” refers to (a) ICANN being
subject to U.S. and California law as a result of its incorporation and
location in California, (b) ICANN being subject to the laws of any other
country as a result of its location *within *or contacts with that country,
or (c) any “choice of law” or venue provisions in agreements with ICANN.

On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 9:58 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:

> All:
>
> Based on discussions on our last call and the list, I've revised these
> questions as follows (added text underlined).  Please reply to this email
> with any comments or suggested changes.
>
> Greg
>
> 1.       Has your business, your privacy or your ability to use or
> purchase DNS-related services been affected by ICANN's jurisdiction* in any
> way?
>
> If the answer is Yes, please describe specific cases, situations or
> incidents, including the date, the parties involved, and links to any
> relevant documents.  Please note that *“affected”* may *refer to *positive
> *and/*or negative *effects*.
>
> 2.       Has ICANN's jurisdiction* affected any dispute resolution process
> or litigation related to domain names you have been involved in?
>
> If the answer is Yes, please describe specific cases, situations or
> incidents, including the date, the parties involved, and links to any
> relevant documents.    Please note that *“affected”* may *refer to*
> positive *and/*or negative *effects*.
>
> 3.       Do you have copies of and/or links to any *verifiable* reports
> of experiences of other parties that would be responsive to the questions
> above?
>
> If the answer is yes, please provide these copies and/or links.
>
> _____________________________
>
> *  For these questions, “ICANN’s jurisdiction” refers to (a) ICANN being
> subject to U.S. and California law as a result of its incorporation and
> location in California, (b) ICANN being subject to the laws of any other
> country as a result of its location or contacts with that country, or (c)
> any “choice of law” or venue provisions in agreements with ICANN.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20161205/1ace8ee6/attachment.html>