[Ws2-jurisdiction] Partial immunity

[avri doria]

But he corrected his statement after being reminded of the issue of
partial or tailored immunity. I am grateful he did so.  What is
important to me is that it was corrected.  There are so many issues, sub
issues and nuances, that I do not expect any chair to get it right all
the time.  What I do expect is for corrections to be made when
necessary. And that is what, I believe, happened.

I do not see this as a cover-up but rather a proper and timely correction. 

In fact, in a group with archived lists, I have trouble understanding
any of this in such harsh terms such as "cover up".

avri



On 25-Jun-17 08:18, parminder wrote:
>
> On Friday 23 June 2017 02:58 AM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> As previously mentioned, we will address the issue of the procedural decision the co-chairs took during our meeting at ICANN59 in detail. 
>>
>> However, given the ongoing debate on the list, let me please offer a clarification on one aspect of what I said and, more importantly, what was not said. 
>>
>> The co-chairs established that
>>
>> 1. Relocalization of ICANN to another jurisdiction and
>> 2. Making ICANN an immune organization
>>
>> were suggestions that did not get sufficient traction to be further pursued. 
>>
>> I did not speak to the question of partial immunity. 
>
> Thomas, Let me quote your decision as officially recorded, taking the
> liberty to highlight relevant parts.
>
>     We have concluded that the Jurisdiction sub-group will take
>     California jurisdiction as a base line for all its
>     recommendations, and that the sub-team not pursue recommendations
>     to change ICANN's jurisdiction of incorporation, location of
>     headquarters*or seek immunity for ICANN*.  With this decision we
>     are recognizing that there is no possibility that there would be
>     consensus for*an immunity based concept* or a change of place of
>     incorporation.  As such I would establish in the minutes of this
>     call that we focus on the solution that gets most traction. 
>     Recognizing that this does not eliminate, as I think Avri said
>     during last week's call, that we can discuss all issues that might
>     arise during the deliberations.  But that we actually focus on the
>     status quo being California law and place of incorporation. and
>     work on solutions that are founded on this.
>
>
> (quote ends)
>
> You clearly removed discussions and possible recommendations on "an
> immunity based concept", which evidently includes everything related
> to possible immunities, that phrase seems specifically tailored to
> cover anything that included the concept of immunity - partial
> immunity, tailored immunity, whatever. Expecting that you made this
> sweeping decision after having closely observed the concerned
> discussions on the list, or being duly reported about them, I cannot
> see how you could have missed the fact that much of the immunity
> discussions involved partial or tailored immunity.
>
> In the circumstances, I see this post facto amendment to the decision,
> after facing strong criticism about the process adopted by you to
> arrive at it, as an attempt to some make adjustments to its substance
> to cover up what are strong procedural faults with the decision. The
> process you adopted was wrong, and the decision should be withdrawn in
> all aspects for that reason alone.
>
> regards, parminder
>
>
>> Please note that this clarification is in no way intended to be understood as an endorsement of the concept of partial or relative immunity, but I thought it was necessary to go on the record on this aspect. 
>>
>> Thanks and kind regards,
>> Thomas
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus