<div><div dir="auto">Kavouss,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I am out for the day, so I will give this a more detailed review later. One quick question -- what section of the RAA are you referring to? That will help the Subgroup understand your proposal better. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thank you.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Greg</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 2:21 AM Kavouss Arasteh <<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div>De ar Greg,</div><div>Sorry for misinterpretation .I did not make any allegatiuon at all </div><div>I just reflected my impression of the way the matter is treated. </div><div>The statement you made above, could only be interpreted that the suggestion made is not favoured by you according to your reasoning and or your judgement .</div><div>In my view when Something is not pursued it is blocked.My be the term blocked was not a correct one but in reality it did not carried forward</div><div>Sorry ,if the term " Blocked " boithered you then I replaced it by <font color="#0000ff">" is not currently being carried forward " </font></div><div>Now back to the issue Under discussion </div><div>Yes , it does not have direct relation with OFAC but why not you mention what you said in your last reply as follows</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><font color="#0000ff"><strong>"It was reported to the Group that a registrar ( RESELLO) has developed / used a business policy of not doing business with Iranian passport holders, independent of any sanctions, US or otherwise. This may be a bad policy, .The group did not conclude that it has any direct ( or indirect ) connection to sanctions (US or otherwise) or ICANN's jurisdiction.The Group inferred from Resello's decision that there are reasons, unrelated to OFAC, for declining to do business with nationals of an OFAC-sanctioned country. There seems to be legitimate that ICANN investigate the matter carefully and remind RESELLO that such course of action would be counterproductive as it is contray to the terms and conditions specified7 stipulated in the RAA".</strong></font></div><div><font color="#ff0000"><br></font></div><div><font color="#ff0000">As you know I have raised this matter, independently from the activities of the Jurisdiction Group with Chairman,and CEO of ICANN and chair of the GNSO Council copied to to CCWG co-chairs and you .</font></div><div><br></div><div>Now may I kindly request you to consider the language that I proposed you and include it in appropriate / relevant part of the Report with ,possibly, some cross refernce in the body of recommands part .</div><div>Awaiting your kind consideration and quick reply</div></div><div><div>Kavouss </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Greg Shatan <span><<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Kavouss,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I am not "blocking" anything, either. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">It is a very serious allegation to say that a rapporteur is blocking something that they "do not like." You have absolutely no idea what I "like" and "do not like."</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">The "problem" with "indicating" the Resello situation "in the introductory part of the Report" is that it has absolutely no connection, direct or indirect, to OFAC sanctions or to ICANN's "jurisdiction" -- in the US or elsewhere.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">You have chosen to infer that Resello's policy is somehow related to OFAC, even though they are a non-US registrar and they have made absolutely no reference to OFAC or US law or ICANN. There is no basis for that inference. Without a basis, there is no reason for the Subgroup to include the Resello situation in the Recommendations on US sanctions or sanctions generally.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Without any connection to OFAC, sanctions regime or ICANN's jurisdiction, "Resello" only shows us that a registrar has a business policy of not entering into reseller agreements with Iranian passport holders. Personally, I do not like this policy (so now you have some idea what I "do not like"), though I would want more facts before making a final judgment. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">But why would it be in our Report? It shows that a registrar developed a business policy of not doing business with Iranian passport holders, independent of any sanctions, US or otherwise. This may be a bad policy, but we can't say it has any connection to sanctions (US or otherwise) or ICANN's jurisdiction. Putting this in the Report would not support any Issues or Recommendation the Subgroup has identified. If anything, it would be counterproductive, as it could infer from Resello's decision that there are reasons, unrelated to OFAC, for declining to do business with nationals of an OFAC-sanctioned country. Why would we want that in this Report?</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">I look forward to your response to these concerns.</span></div><div class="gmail_default"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12.8px">Best regards,</span></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12.8px">Greg Shatan</span></font></div></div><div class="m_4039517215738624092HOEnZb"><div class="m_4039517215738624092h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Erika Mann <span><<a href="mailto:erika@erikamann.com" target="_blank">erika@erikamann.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div>Dear Kavouss - <div>I'm not blocking anything. Just making a comment with regard to the point you raised in relation to the Dutch case, insofar that I was saying the Dutch decision might relate to an EU restriction and not to an US restriction. </div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards, </div><span class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div>Erika</div></font></span></div><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297HOEnZb"><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:09 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <span><<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com" target="_blank">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div><div>Dear Greg</div><div>Dear Erika$</div><div> What is the problem that you indicate that in the introductory part of the Report.</div><div>You have asked me on 13 and 18 of September to provide you with the factual evidence on this type of discrimination or restriction and I have provided that to you.</div><div>You you are blocking it. You are are expected to reflect the report on this type of restriction whether directly or indirectly related to OFAC.</div><div>Your action is not to decide what is right and what is wrong. There is no veto right given to you .I insist to reflect that .</div><div>Pls kindly do not further block this</div><div>You blocking whatever, you do not like </div><div>Pls kindly, ionce again. be helpful, fair and collaborative </div><div>Regards</div><span class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div>Kavouss </div></font></span></div><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633HOEnZb"><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:06 PM, Greg Shatan <span><<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Kavouss,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">As a factual happening, I don't see why this should be reflected in our report. Resello's business decision does not seem to be related to OFAC, US jurisdiction or to any ICANN-related jurisdiction.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I asked you whether Resello's agreement with ICANN (the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA)) prohibits Resello from establishing the policy you have mentioned. If ICANN does not prohibit this policy, and it is not triggered by OFAC or some other connection to ICANN's jurisdictions, then it seems to be unconnected to our work.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I don't know whether there is an EU or Dutch law that requires this policy, or whether there is one that prohibits it. If there is one that requires it, that is not an "ICANN jurisdiction" issue. If there is one that prohibits it and Resello is violating Dutch law, then it may be that Resello is violating the RAA requirement (Section 3.7.2) that Registrars abide by applicable law. But again, that's a Compliance issue.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Best regards,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div></div><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633m_3131242299453872107HOEnZb"><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633m_3131242299453872107h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <span><<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com" target="_blank">kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div><div>Dear Greg</div><div>I do not know what question you raised. </div><div>If you believe that <font size="3"><font color="#000000"><font face="Calibri"><strong><em>Mark Assenberg<br></em> from Resello which is a subsidiary company for </strong><strong>Yourholding<span></span></strong><strong> holding:</strong></font></font></font></div><p style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><b>with the below address <a href="https://maps.google.com/?q=Ceintuurbaan+28+8024+AA+Zwolle&entry=gmail&source=g" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight:normal"><font color="#0563c1" face="Calibri" size="3">Ceintuurbaan 28</font></span></a><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">,<a href="https://maps.google.com/?q=Ceintuurbaan+28+8024+AA+Zwolle&entry=gmail&source=g" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight:normal"><font color="#0563c1" face="Calibri" size="3">8024 AA Zwolle</font></span></a><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3">, <a href="tel:+31%2038%20453%200752" value="+31384530752" target="_blank">+31 38 453 0752</a></font></font></b></p><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3"><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><div style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font color="#000000" face="Calibri" size="3"><strong>based in Netherlands.being a non US-Based company on the basis of which </strong>section of the RAA refrain such a business decision (i.e., a registrar deciding not to do business with citizens of a given country (whether it is Canada, Haiti, Iran or otherwise)?</font></div><div style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font face="Calibri">May you address this issue as a factual happening .</font></div><div style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font face="Calibri">Pls kindly advise how you trest and reflect that in the report</font></div><div style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font face="Calibri">Regards</font></div><span class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633m_3131242299453872107m_179421586796006409HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div style="margin:0in 0in 8pt"><font face="Calibri">Kavouss </font></div></font></span></font></font></div><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633m_3131242299453872107m_179421586796006409HOEnZb"><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633m_3131242299453872107m_179421586796006409h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Nigel Roberts <span><<a href="mailto:nigel@channelisles.net" target="_blank">nigel@channelisles.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><span><br>
<br>
On 20/09/17 18:19, Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid">
Can you please guide me to the section of the RAA that would prevent<br>
such a business decision (i.e., a registrar deciding not to do business<br>
with citizens of a given country (whether it is Canada, Haiti, Iran or<br>
otherwise)?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
In the United Kingdom, never mind the RAA<a href="https://maps.google.com/?q=Ceintuurbaan+28,8024+AA+Zwolle+%3Chttps://maps.google.com/?q%3DCeintuurbaan%2B28%2B8024%2BAA%2BZwolle%26entry%3Dgmail%26source%3Dg%3E&entry=gmail&source=g" target="_blank">,</a> this would be quite illegal (see s.13, prohibited conduct) unless such treatment is required by law (e.g. required by legally binding sanctions).<br>
<br>
How can anyone in the 21st century believe that any "business decision" doctrine could allow making decisions on the basis of race/citizenship (or any other protected characteristic) is quite alien over here and incomprehensible.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15</a><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633m_3131242299453872107m_179421586796006409m_-6991801866680924351HOEnZb"><div class="m_4039517215738624092m_-7351606024618361297m_436626776158098633m_3131242299453872107m_179421586796006409m_-6991801866680924351h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org" target="_blank">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org" target="_blank">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div></div>