<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><br>
</p>
<p><font face="Verdana">In the google doc on 'multiple layers of
jurisdiction' I see the comment made by Greg that (1) any
jurisdictional immunity for ICANN will require multilateral
treaty, and (2) could block accountability enforcement
mechanism.</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">I think these are the key issues to discuss.</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Reg 1 above, it is not true. I just now
added the following in the google doc. <br>
</font></p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;"><font
face="Verdana">"</font><span
style="font-size:14.666666666666666px;font-family:Arial;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;">It
is possible to obtain jurisdictional immunity for ICANN without
entering into multilateral treaties/ conventions. This can be
done under </span><span
style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;">United
States International Organisations Immunities Act</span><span
style="font-size:14.666666666666666px;font-family:Arial;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;">
(see </span><a
href="https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/annex9.pdf"
style="text-decoration:none;"><span
style="font-size:14.666666666666666px;font-family:Arial;color:#1155cc;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:underline;vertical-align:baseline;">https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/annex9.pdf</span></a><span
style="font-size:14.666666666666666px;font-family:Arial;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;">
). There is precedent of such immunities being given to
organisations that, like ICANN, are registered as an non profit.
</span><a
href="https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/corell-24aug06.html"
style="text-decoration:none;"><span
style="font-size:14.666666666666666px;font-family:Arial;color:#1155cc;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:underline;vertical-align:baseline;">This
study commissioned by ICANN</span></a><span
style="font-size:14.666666666666666px;font-family:Arial;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;">
cites the example of </span><span
style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#000000;background-color:transparent;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;">International
Fertilizer and Development Center which was designated as a
public, nonprofit, international organisation by US Presidential
Decree, granting it immunities under the mentioned US Act."</span></p>
<br>
As for 2 above, one, I am sure that jurisdictional immunity can be
structured in a manner that it does not effect th required judicial
processes around accountability enforcement, and two, accountability
enforcement processes are in any case private law issues and a
jurisdiction can be specifically chosen for its enforcement
(preferably US jurisdiction). <br>
<br>
I will like to hear arguments why we should not recommend that ICANN
be granted jurisdictional immunity by using the above mentioned US
Act. Is there at all any case against it?<br>
<br>
I will like this issue brought up at the f2f meeting in Hyderabad. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 30 October 2016 03:23 PM,
parminder wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:54bbb337-92e8-df3f-4bde-27ebd134e376@itforchange.net"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
On Saturday 29 October 2016 07:37 PM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:00f801d231ed$c5ff51a0$51fdf4e0$@redbranchconsulting.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 56.7pt 70.85pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">I’m
sorry, but that’s just wrong Paraminder. The fact that
ICANN is a US corproaration has nothing to do with its
subject to public law in any way different than the fact
that it has an office in Istabul subjects it to Turkish
public law. To the extent ICANN operates as a
coroporation it is subject to the public law of every
jurisdiction where it operates. It can be sued for
anti-competitive behavior in India today, if someone were
so minded, provided that an allegation of violating Indian
law could be raised.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Paul, on the contrary I'd request you, lets talk on facts, and not
fanciful notions.<br>
<br>
It is plain wrong to say that US public law applies on ICANN in
the same way as Turkish or Indian law does. I dont know why are
you even proposing such a completely unsustainable notion. I am
not sure how to express my strong feelings against such a
falsehood but let me try this: I am fine if this group makes a
clear determination that "US public law applies to ICANN in
exactly the same manner as of any other country" and writes it
down as a finding in its report. I will like to see how a group of
such well respected people and experts says such a thing. Of
course, I am saying this bec I know that the group would never
formally enter such a determination.<br>
<br>
But now since you have made this claim, and I do remember you have
made it a few times earlier, and no one else has refuted it, Let
me make a few points, but very briefly, bec I really do not
consider this a serious proposition at all. <br>
<br>
I gave many examples of how US public law can interfere with
ICANN's policy operation. Can you provide me with corresponding
ways in which another country's law can interfere in the same or
even similar way.... I do not want to bore the group by re listing
all those examples, which I have done more than once in this
discussion. <br>
<br>
A US court can change the decision of delegation of any gTLD,
wherever the registry may be based. It can also impose the wisdom
of US law over the domain allocation conditions of a gTLD. This it
can do by direct fiat to ICANN. <br>
<br>
Other countries can interfere in operation of the DNS within their
jurisdiction. They can direct registries and registrars located
within their jurisdiction to act or not act in certain ways. US,
on the other hand, can directly force the hand of ICANN in terms
of its entire global operation, policy making as well as
implementation work, including changes in the root file.<br>
<br>
I work in the management of an Indian non profit, which does multi
country research projects. It would be most astonishing for me to
hear that my non profit is equally subject to non Indian
jurisdictions as it is to the Indian law. I am quite painfully
aware that this is not a fact, not even close to it. For instance,
when we do multi country project coordinated and run from India, I
fully know how Indian law applies on the entirety of our actions
and therefore of the overall project, whereas the courts of
another country where a research team may do research for/ with us
can interfere within that county for that part of the project. it
is so simple and commonly understood, I wonder why am I even
arguing it. <br>
<br>
Please lets not trash other people's important concerns in such
offhand-ish manner... US's public law being applied unilaterally
on the ICANN is a real problem with regard to the latter's global
governance function. Let us explore what we can do about it..<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:00f801d231ed$c5ff51a0$51fdf4e0$@redbranchconsulting.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">Paul
Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com"><span
style="color:#0563C1">paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">O:
+1 (202) 547-0660<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">M:
+1 (202) 329-9650<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">VOIP:
+1 (202) 738-1739<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/"><span
style="color:#0563C1">www.redbranchconsulting.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">My
PGP Key: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/"><span
style="color:#0563C1">http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/</span></a>
</span><u><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#0563C1"><o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org">ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org">mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>parminder<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, October 29, 2016 5:30 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple Layers
of Jurisdiction Document<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Friday 28 October 2016 07:39 PM,
Paul Rosenzweig wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">To
which one needs to add that the principal reason the
case is in California is that California is specified as
the venue (and also as the substantive decisional law)
in ICANN’s contracts. As a general matter ICANN is free
to specify that the next such dispute be determined by
an arbital panel in London (as an example) if it wishes,
or using Swiss (another example) concepts of procedural
due process. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
This may be true for issues of breach of contract, but not
for issues of public law, like anti competitive practices,
or fraud. In the latter set, there is no choice of law
available. ICANN as US not profit is subject to US law and
can be sued under it, or the state may take suo moto action.<br>
<br>
As from tis discussion, It has been clear during the working
of this group that, in terms of the mandate of this group to
give recs on the jurisdiction issue, there are two very
different set of issues that come up for consideration which
will require very different kind of recs.<br>
<br>
One set is of such issues where a choice of jurisdiction is
available. With regard to these issues, this subgroup has to
determine how this available choice should be exercised.<br>
<br>
The second set is of such issues where no choice of
application of law is available, and the law of the place of
incorporation and HQ applies. This is the trickly part, and
we have to determine (1) what kind of problems may faced in
the future, (2) how serious they are, their ramifications
etc, (3) what, if anything at all, can be done with regard
to this issue (4) what are the benefits and drawbacks of
different possible options, (5) considering all these
elements, is it worth recommending one or more options. <br>
<br>
It will be most useful is our work is organised in line with
the kind of recommendations that we may make, which I see is
as above. I do not see why our current documents keep these
two different kinds of issues mixed, which admit of very
different 'jurisdictional' treatment. Neither can I
understand the logic of trying to eliminate right away some
possible options that come much later in the discussion,
instead of leading a structured discussion towards them. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Paul</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Paul
Rosenzweig</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com">paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">O:
+1 (202) 547-0660</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">M:
+1 (202) 329-9650</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">VOIP:
+1 (202) 738-1739</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/">www.redbranchconsulting.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">My
PGP Key: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/">http://redbranchconsulting.com/who-we-are/public-pgp-key/</a>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org">ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org">mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Mueller, Milton L<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, October 27, 2016 9:04 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>;
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple
Layers of Jurisdiction Document</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">One
thing to keep in mind about these court cases. The
litigation concerns such things as whether ICANN was in
breach of contract, whether it committed fraud, and
whether it needs to be ordered to follow the IRP
decision. It does _<i>not</i>_ put an American court in
the position of deciding which of two applicants for the
.AFRICA domain are the more worthy. In other words, the
U.S. court in this case is not the policy maker, it is a
settler of legal disputes among contracting or would-be
contracting parties. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">--MM</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
name="_MailEndCompose"></a><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org">ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org">mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, October 27, 2016 4:00 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>;
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple
Layers of Jurisdiction Document</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Hi,
here’s the website about the „.africa“ issue I
mentioned in the chat: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.africainonespace.org/litigation.php">http://www.africainonespace.org/litigation.php</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Cheers</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Jorge</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"
lang="DE">Von:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"
lang="DE"> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org">ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org">mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>Im Auftrag von </b>Greg Shatan<br>
<b>Gesendet:</b> Donnerstag, 27. Oktober 2016 20:59<br>
<b>An:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> [Ws2-jurisdiction] Multiple Layers of
Jurisdiction Document</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"
lang="DE-CH"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>