[Ws2-jurisdiction] Question Presented

[Bartlett Morgan]

Also +1

On Jun 8, 2017 4:33 PM, "Cheryl Langdon-Orr" <langdonorr at gmail.com> wrote:

> Agreed
>
> On 9 Jun. 2017 05:52, "icannlists" <icannlists at winston.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Paul R.
>>
>>
>>
>> Greg, I agree with this – mostly.  I do think it is worth noting in our
>> final report that the issue of moving ICANN’s formation jurisdiction
>> outside of California was discussed at great length by this group and there
>> was no consensus to do so.  Otherwise, our report would look like we just
>> assumed that California formation would remain but did not discuss it.
>> That would not be accurate.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Paul M.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Paul D. McGrady Jr.*
>>
>> *Partner *
>>
>> *Chair, Trademark, Domain Names and Brand Enforcement Practice *
>>
>> Winston & Strawn LLP
>> 35 W. Wacker Drive
>> Chicago, IL 60601-9703
>>
>> D: +1 (312) 558-5963 <+1%20312-558-5963>
>>
>> F: +1 (312) 558-5700 <+1%20312-558-5700>
>>
>> Bio <http://www.winston.com/en/who-we-are/attorneys/mcgrady-paul-d.html>
>>  | VCard <http://www.winston.com/vcards/996.vcf> | Email
>> <pmcgrady at winston.com> | winston.com <http://www.winston.com>
>>
>> [image: Winston & Strawn LLP]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounc
>> es at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Paul Rosenzweig
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 08, 2017 2:13 PM
>> *To:* 'Greg Shatan' <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>; 'ws2-jurisdiction' <
>> ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
>> *Cc:* acct-staff at icann.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Question Presented
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Greg
>>
>>
>>
>> Per our discussion on the call today, I would suggest a slight amendment
>> to this strawman proposal.  My take is that, as Avri suggested, the
>> Subgroup should continue its work on the basis of an assumption that the
>> jurisdiction of incorporation will remain unchanged and that our report to
>> the Plenary will state that as an assumption (rather than, as David has
>> suggested (and I would support) as a conclusion or recommendation).  This
>> will enable us to work forward on real issues of accountability effects
>> arising from incorporation and move past the endless recircling we are
>> doing.
>>
>>
>>
>> The practical consequences of this choice would be to confine our
>> discussion in two ways.  When a potential issue that effects accountability
>> is raised (e.g. OFAC or in rem) it would not be a response to say “well, we
>> are stuck with that because we are in California” but it would also no
>> longer be a suitable response to say “we can eliminate that problem by
>> moving to XXX”  Our work would, as I understand it, focus on the question
>> of “can that problem be mitigated by the application of other aspects of
>> California/US/contractual law” (that is law that assumes that incorporation
>> is unchanged but, for example, admits of the possibility that ICANN might
>> be able to contract around some problems).  I would support this approach,
>> as did a majority of those on the call (maybe even everyone).
>>
>>
>>
>> Thus I would reformulate your submission to the Plenary as a report of
>> what we have determined as the way forward – namely to assume that the
>> place of incorporation will not change, but to make explicit the premise
>> that our assumption is without prejudice to the issue being raised in some
>> other broader forum.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul Rosenzweig
>>
>> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
>>
>> O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <+1%20202-547-0660>
>>
>> M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <+1%20202-329-9650>
>>
>> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <+1%20202-738-1739>
>>
>> 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 *Greg
>> Shatan
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 8, 2017 9:29 AM
>> *To:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
>> *Cc:* acct-staff at icann.org
>> *Subject:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] Question Presented
>>
>>
>>
>> Please see attached.
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. If this
>> message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it.
>> Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable
>> privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of
>> the author. Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be
>> used, and cannot be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties
>> under applicable tax laws and regulations.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20170609/a1523087/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2044 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170609/a1523087/image001-0001.jpg>