[Ws2-jurisdiction] [Issue and Solution] Seeking an OFAC License process

[Seun Ojedeji]

I read Progress in this thread!!!

Thanks
Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On Aug 21, 2017 4:55 AM, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:

It appears to me that creation of a general license involves a regulatory
process, which is in the purview of the executive branch (more
specifically, the U.S. Treasury, of which OFAC is a part). Indeed, 31 CFR §
595.305 defines a general license as “any license or authorization the
terms of which are set forth in this part.”  In other words, the general
license is a part of the OFAC regulations.  General licenses apply to
classes of persons and types of transactions.

By contrast, a specific license is sought through an application to OFAC
and the license is issued by OFAC.  Individual licenses are party-specific
and transaction-specific.

Greg

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
wrote:

> It’s not clear to me that a general license requires legislation. It might
> be something that the executive branch can do. Also, while getting
> recognition for a general license might take time, once it was done it
> would be done, whereas every individual application has to be handled again
> and again and again….
>
>
>
> --MM
>
>
>
> However lengthy the OFAC license application process, I am quite confident
> that seeking a legislative immunity solution in the US would be even
> lengthier ☹
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
>
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
>
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
>
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
>
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
>
> www.redbranchconsulting.com
>
> My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830
> 097CA066684
>
>
>
> *From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc
> es at icann.org <ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *farzaneh
> badii
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 20, 2017 10:36 AM
> *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] [Issue and Solution] Seeking an OFAC
> License process
>
>
>
> Seeking an OFAC license has been reported to be lengthy and not very
> transparent. Also as Mr. Rodenbaugh explained below, OFAC licenses are
> time-limited and require a periodic application. It can hamper
> registries/registrars businesses.
>
>  ICANN has reportedly been untransparent about the application of OFAC
> license process.
>
>
>
> Solution: ICANN should commit to apply for an OFAC license and be
> transparent about the application process and its actions with regards to
> application.
>
>
>
> As to the lengthy nature of the process, perhaps attempting to receive a
> general OFAC license for ICANN functions would be a solution for all this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com>
> wrote:
>
> I agree with Jeff's proposal that ICANN be required to make a good faith
> application for OFAC license whenever it is necessary to fulfill the
> purpose of registry and/or registrar agreements.  And I support his 2d
> question, requesting details.
>
>
>
> Note that OFAC doesn't just hamper registries and registrars located or
> formed in sanctioned countries, but also registries and registrars with
> officers, directors or significant shareholders from any of the sanctioned
> countries (regardless where the business is located or formed).  Note
> further that OFAC licenses are time-limited, requiring periodic
> reapplication.  And ICANN legal has told me that they were not required to
> seek an OFAC license for my client, even though that client had executed
> registry agreements with ICANN.  I disputed that, and they got the license;
> but there is no guarantee they will seek it again when it expires, even
> though the registries are live.
>
>
>
> I can't see any good reason why ICANN should not be required at least to
> make a good faith effort to get a license.  It seems at least to be implied
> in the registry agreement anyway, via the covenant of good faith and fair
> dealing inherent in every contract (at least under California law).  If
> ICANN refused to seek a license, it would frustrate the purpose of the
> entire agreement.
>
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
>
> RODENBAUGH LAW
>
> tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087 <(415)%20738-8087>
>
> http://rodenbaugh.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>
>

_______________________________________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170821/d2aab3f4/attachment.html>