[Ws2-jurisdiction] ISSUE: US Jurisdiction over ICANN's activities that comply with GAC advice or that are otherwise based on powers or prerogatives recognised onto Governments under ICANN's multistakeholder governance model

[Bartlett Morgan]

+1 Milton's comment

On Aug 22, 2017 5:47 PM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:

Thiago

If I understand what you are saying here, I have to totally reject it, and
I suspect most others in this group will.

What you seem to be saying here:



Proposed solution: ICANN shall establish a compulsory dispute settlement
mechanism, or commit to have recourse to international arbitration, for
disputes relating to ICANN's activities that have been the subject of GAC
advice or are otherwise subject to Governmental authority as recognized
under ICANN's laws.



…is that GAC advice should supersede the normal ICANN bottom up
multistakeholder policy development process (BUMP) and be subject to a
special dispute resolution procedure that applies to ICANN and GAC alone.



This is a brazen power play to redesign ICANN in a way that transforms it
into an intergovernmental institution. It ain’t ever going to happen,
Thiago, except perhaps in your dreams.



Let me add that “independent accountability mechanisms” such as the IRP and
the empowered community process already exist and no changes need to me
made based on jurisdictional issues. Those mechanisms are not subject to
arbitrary interference from the USG based on ICANN’s 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/20170822/a6a52f36/attachment.html>