[Ws2-jurisdiction] Latest Revised Draft of Jurisdiction Subgroup Report

[Greg Shatan]

All:

Attached is a further revised version of the Jurisdiction subgroup report,
in both Word and PDF.  This draft is also available on Google Docs at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rdMJyvZdyN9TApT6gx_3NwpdvIL7YKHEUD7tNfLf6hU/edit?usp=sharing

This latest draft reflects changes made over the course of the day,
primarily:

*NOTE 2:* This has been revised so that the Report recommends that the
Registry (or Registrar) choose from among the choice of law options on the
“menu,” i.e., the choice would not be negotiated with the ICANN.  This is
opposite to the way this issue was presented in the immediate prior draft.

*NOTE 4:* In the “Overview of the Work of the Subgroup,” the following has
been added, in response to Thiago’s suggestion:

As a result of these discussions [in Abu Dhabi], the section “Further
Discussions of Jurisdiction-Related Concerns” was added the draft Report,
suggesting a path forward for these concerns beyond the CCWG-Accountability
through a further other multistakeholder process.

*NOTE 4.1:* Thiago has since clarified that his suggestion is that
“Comments by other countries [not just France] in support for the further
jurisdiction-related discussions, in particular immunities, should be
specifically referenced."

Steve Delbianco, responding to the earlier formulation, stated:  “I do not
understand the justification to single-out one comment (that of France)
among so many that we received and considered. Pending an explanation of
that justification, I would not support a note that calls attention to just
one comment.”

Thiago, then replied: “On Note 4, it is a fair point, and I do not wish to
push it further. My main point was as I clarified, to add text reflecting
the subsequent addition to the report of the “further discussions on
jurisdiction-related concerns”, and not so much concerned with singling out
any of the comments received. So, again, what appears as Note 4 is distinct
and independent from what appears as Note 4.1.  Yet I would only suggest
dropping point 4.1 if others believe that the report, as slightly revised
in reaction to the public comments received, did respond at least in some
fashion to the comments that joined their voices to Brazil’s dissent in
asking for further discussions to take place, notably on immunity.  This
not being the case, I do believe – as Greg suggested – it would be fair to
also explicitly give similar satisfaction to the contrary voices, which
however, as I clarified in our previous call, are not really contrary to
Brazil’s dissent, which fact should in my view be made explicit in the
report as part of the subgroup’s response to the comments received.”



I should clarify that my suggestion (as noted above by Thiago) does not
imply that I support that particular outcome.

*NOTE 6.1: *A “friendly amendment” was made on last week’s call to Stress
Test 1 in “Proposed Accountability Measures,” to clarify that any
registrar’s ability to “accept domain registration requests from citizens
of any country” is still “subject to limitations and obligations due to
applicable law and registry restrictions.”

The other points remain unchanged from when this draft was circulated at
roughly 06:00 UTC this morning/last night.

I will circulate an Agenda and list of the “NOTES” shortly.

Greg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20180228/f93580cc/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Final Draft v1.2.6.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 338406 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20180228/f93580cc/CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-FinalDraftv1.2.6-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-Final Draft v1.2.6.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 47607 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20180228/f93580cc/CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Jurisdiction-FinalDraftv1.2.6-0001.docx>