[Ws2-jurisdiction] FINAL DRAFT REVISED REPORT OF JURISDICTION SUBGROUP

[Greg Shatan]

Thiago,

Thank for clarifying your suggestions.  In response, your main point, I
have now added a new sentence to the Google doc on page 11, after “A
transcript of these discussions is included as Annex [F] to this Report.”
 The new sentence reads:  “As a result of these discussions, the section
“Further Discussions of Jurisdiction-Related Concerns” was added to the
draft Report, suggesting a path forward for these concerns beyond the
CCWG-Accountability through a further other multistakeholder process.”

This new sentence is in “suggest” mode and should be reviewed by you and
other Subgroup participants.  I will also  circulate Word and PDF versions
as soon as I can, but I am stepping out for a meeting and will be gone for
a couple of hours.

On the other point, it is general practice in the CCWG not to mention
specific comments in the body of the report.  Some of the reasons for his
were discussed 3 meetings ago with Co-Chair Thomas Rickert.  Nonetheless,
if you want to suggest some specific text for the Subgroup to consider, we
can see if there is significant support for such an addition. If so, I
believe it would be appropriate, for accuracy and balance, to mention all
comments that took a view on this, regardless of which view they took.

Best regards,

Greg







On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:20 AM Thiago Braz Jardim Oliveira <
thiago.jardim at itamaraty.gov.br> wrote:

> Dear Greg,
>
>
>
> Thank you for this.
>
>
>
> Specifically on the comments and sugestions of changes featuring on page
> 11, I think you may have misread my suggestion of adding some text in
> there, which would be, as agreed during the call, part of the “SUMMARY OF
> WORK OF SUBGROUP BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER COMMENT PERIOD”.
>
>
>
> My main point was that we should include on page 11, as part of the
> summary of what happened following in particular the objection to the
> report by some of the participants, that it was subsequently recognised in
> the report, prior to its being submitted to public comments, that “further
> discussions of jurisdiction-related concerns” (p. 26 of the report) are
> needed, in particular on the subject of immunities. This would describe
> what happened, in terms of process as well, and would avoid giving the
> impression that the report had always referenced the need of discussing
> such issues as immunity from US jurisdiction.
>
>
>
> And only then, in connection to the point above, comments by other
> countries in support for the further jurisdiction-related discussions, in
> particular immunities, should be specifically referenced. But this point
> here is not to be confused with the previous one. Hope this helps.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Thiago
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *De:* Ws2-jurisdiction [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] *Em
> nome de *Greg Shatan
> *Enviada em:* terça-feira, 27 de fevereiro de 2018 03:17
> *Para:* ws2-jurisdiction
> *Assunto:* [Ws2-jurisdiction] FINAL DRAFT REVISED REPORT OF JURISDICTION
> SUBGROUP
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> The final draft of the revised Jurisdiction Subgroup report is attached
> for your review.  The Google doc version is at *MailScanner has detected
> definite fraud in the website at "docs.google.com". Do not trust this
> website:* *MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at
> "docs.google.com". Do not trust this website:*
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rdMJyvZdyN9TApT6gx_3NwpdvIL7YKHEUD7tNfLf6hU/edit?usp=sharing
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rdMJyvZdyN9TApT6gx_3NwpdvIL7YKHEUD7tNfLf6hU/edit?usp=sharing>
>
>
>
> *PLEASE SPECIFICALLY REVIEW THE SIX "NOTES" IN THE MARGINAL COMMENTS.
> THESE SHOW WHERE POSSIBLE CHANGES TO THE REPORT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AND
> TENTATIVELY RESOLVED.*
>
>
>
> *PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR POSITION ON THESE SIX NOTES, PARTICULARLY IF YOU
> OBJECT TO THE RESOLUTION IN THE BODY OF THE REPORT. (Expressions of support
> are welcome, but not necessary.  Lack of response will be interpreted as
> "Can live with it.")*
>
>
>
> *THIS IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT IF YOU WILL NOT BE ON WEDNESDAY'S CALL, SO
> YOUR VOICE CAN BE HEARD. The Report must be submitted to the Plenary no
> later than Friday, March 2 (two days after our call).*
>
>
>
> Thank you for your review.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Esta mensagem foi verificada pelas ferramentas de detecção de ataques do
> Ministério e nenhuma ameaça cibernética foi encontrada. Não obstante,
> recomenda-se cautela, especialmente se solicitar dados pessoais e senhas ou
> se contiver anexos.*
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20180227/0dc1fe8c/attachment-0001.html>