<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi all,<div class="">As mentioned on the call, I am personally much in favor of a menu option.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">In my view, time is not really of essence on this particular point as most of the work needs to be done when implementing the recommendation. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">In addition to what I said on the calls, let me offer another argument for this from the perspective of someone located in Europe.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">ICANN limits its liability quite substantially in its contracts with contracted parties. Those limitations cannot be validly passed on by the contracted parties to their respective customers as such clauses would be void. That leaves a gap where the contracted party might need to compensate a customer but cannot claim the amount from ICANN. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Also, while I understand David’s point, David is an expert in US law. Being forced by a de facto monopoly to accept a contract subject to US law surely also has a deterring effect on those who consider to apply for a TLD or seek an accreditation as a registrar. I have experienced numerous times over the years (not in the domain industry I should add) that deals were not signed as contractors were not willing to accept US law as it had too many unknowns for them.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">So if ICANN wants to be truly inclusive at the global level, it needs to lower the hurdle of contracting. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Let me conclude by acknowledging the issues raised by Kavouss with respect to a menu option. I know it is not ideal, but it is a step into the right direction in my view.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thomas</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Am 03.10.2017 um 12:23 schrieb McAuley, David via Ws2-jurisdiction <<a href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org" class="">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a>>:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Dear Greg, all:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">At tomorrow’s meeting, we will again address and attempt to finalize a recommendation on the issue of “Applicable Law and Choice of Venue Provisions.”<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Raphaël originally proposed this in the email below. Thanks to Raphaël for clear posts about this.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">I favor the status quo option. Here is why:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">First, the current contract provisions represent settled approaches, developed over time, among experienced practitioners (ICANN/registries/registrars) in a complex and well-developed DNS industry. On the other hand, our subgroup is an ad-hoc group assembled, in my opinion, to address high level jurisdiction issues. We are proposing to wander into an operational area (contract clauses) where we are simply not equipped to give direction to parties to such contracts. <o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">And, as Sam Eisner told us, these contract provisions are negotiated with the RySG and RrSG and cannot be changed without re-negotiation.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Moreover, by not specifying a governing law, these contracts fall in the welcome ‘Goldilocks’ middle ground – neither forcing contract parties to accept California law nor forcing ICANN to accept laws that may not capable of ensuring adequate regard for the DNS. In short, the parties to the contract should make these decisions – they are the ones who have to, and will continue to, live with the real-world contractual consequences. <o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Second, the proposal is too late for us to properly address even if we should for some unlikely reason get involved. It was formally put on the table just over a month ago, and it cannot be seriously assessed without seeking considered input from ICANN Legal, the RySG, and the RrSG. This is not theoretical to them - their viewpoints are essential. But, preferably, we should let them continue to do what they have been doing these many years without our direction - and stick to the status quo.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Best regards,<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">David<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">David McAuley<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Verisign Inc.<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">703-948-4154<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><b class="">From:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>[<a href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org</a>]<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b class="">On Behalf Of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Raphaël BEAUREGARD-LACROIX<br class=""><b class="">Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Thursday, August 17, 2017 5:58 AM<br class=""><b class="">To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>ws2-jurisdiction <<a href="mailto:ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a>><br class=""><b class="">Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>[EXTERNAL] [Ws2-jurisdiction] ISSUE - absence of choice of law clause in registry agreements<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Dear all, <o:p class=""></o:p></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">I would like to officially submit this issue to the attention of our subgroup.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">I attach here <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">-the case in which I raised this as an issue <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">-the question we formulated to ICANN legal<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">-the response we got from ICANN legal.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">-the follow up<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">-the response to the follow up<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">I can also refer you all to an email from Bernie dated 26 July which contains links to these.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">and for reference purposes<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">-The standard registry agreement (RA)<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">I did not find ICANN legal's answer to be fully satisfying, especially regarding registries, and I would thus like this issue to be included in the final report, with a solution that we will hopefully all agree to! <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Because of the nature of the dispute resolution clause in RAA's concluded with registrars, I think they should be treated as a separate issue, if at all. At any rate, this submission is already long enough as it is! <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><u class="">Issue</u><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">ICANN's standardised contracts with registries do not include a choice of law provisions and are subject to dispute resolution by arbitration under ICC rules. See RA, art. 5.2 <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">As for RAA's concluded with registrars, they can be litigated in court or in arbitration under American Arbitration Association rules. For the simple reason that they can be litigated in court, this makes this issue less of an issue for them. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">For RA litigation, the above clause means that in effect, the arbitrators are free to decide the applicable law according to various factors or methods generally accepted in private international law practice. See ICC Rules of Arbitration art. 21:<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">1)</i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">The parties shall be free to agree upon the rules of law to be applied by the arbitral tribunal to the merits of the dispute. In the absence of any such agreement, the arbitral tribunal shall apply the rules of law which it determines to be appropriate.</i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">2)</i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">The arbitral tribunal shall take account of the provisions of the contract, if any, between the parties and of any relevant trade usages.</i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">This also means that we cannot rely on Californian private international law to predict which law is applicable. Moreover, as far as my understanding of commercial arbitration goes, arbitrators would always decide on a single law for the whole of the contract and will not start carving up legal niches here and there. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Reasonably, there are two options as for the applicable law to these contracts: California law, or the law applicable to the registry, whether it be the law of its main place of business or its own company law. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">I would like to quote here ICANN legal's answer to our follow-up:<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">"Historically, not having a choice of law clause seems to have worked out well in practice. </i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">The lack of a choice of law clause, as far as ICANN is aware, has not presented big problems for either ICANN or contracted parties. </i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">The plain language of the agreement has generally been sufficient to resolve questions between the parties and allow the parties to interpret the performance requirements, their rights and obligations in the ordinary course.</i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">Reliance on the plain language of the agreements normally does not depend on a choice of which jurisdiction’s laws would apply. </i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><i class="">As to why the contracts have evolved in this manner, it has essentially been a compromise that allows the choice of law issue to be handled on an issue-specific basis that takes into account the specific conduct being reviewed, the needs of the parties and ICANN’s global coordination function"</i><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">I fail to see how the RA would satisfy registries outside of the US. Would not they prefer to have a set choice of law rather than an undefined one? And not there being a problem does not mean it cannot be improved. Registries can very well refuse to litigate because of the costs, and this will look like an absence of problem from ICANN's perspective. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Moreover, I plainly reject the contention that<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">"The plain language of the agreement<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></i>(allows)<i class=""><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>the parties to interpret the performance requirements, their rights and obligations in the ordinary course."</i> The only time this can be true is between US parties. This is just wrong for parties outside the US. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">We can all see that these contracts are drafted with US law in mind. I do not even want to imagine what kind of mess would result of trying to fit this contract into any continental European legal system! Or any other legal system for that matter. And even more so if you try to divide obligations between the parties and ascribe them a different governing law...<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">The issue I see with this is that this situation 1) is detrimental to ICANN's accountability and 2) results in more costs for registries in case of dispute. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">As for 1), I believe it is detrimental because being accountable is also being predictable. ICANN has the means to figure out these legal questions well in advance and do a proper risk assessment, while registries and registrars (especially considering the small players) might not. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">As for 2), an undetermined choice of law means you need to hire a lawyer (and not just your ordinary lawyer, a specialised one) to do first and foremost an assessment of which law would be applicable and which is most likely to be applied by the arbitrator(s). This means more money (maybe too much money) gone into legal fees for the small businesses. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><u class="">Solution</u><o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Set the choice of law in those contracts. Given their drafting style, California would make most sense. Now to jump the gun on some criticism that I can see coming, I do believe that most if not all lawyers who can handle domain name industry/ICANN disputes do know California law anyway. This is for the sake of predictability, not for the sake of favouring the US above anyone else. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">I went well beyond the "12 standard lines" rule, but I do hope I made it clear and understandable. <o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class="">Best,<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div></div></div><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">_______________________________________________</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><a href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span id="cid:D1F5ACF89CD2F94DB2E7EB5BB301812F@verisign.com"><RA-31jul17-en.pdf></span><span id="cid:B82AE2C997F1EA4892072150DAD5DD38@verisign.com"><Follow Up on ICANN Legal Answers- RESPONSE FROM ICANN.pdf></span><span id="cid:D8443F400D0515408BC8C0DCC7C32D7E@verisign.com"><Follow Up on ICANN Legal Answers v1dot1.pdf></span><span id="cid:E8DEF81A85F43842A437701DB1C359A6@verisign.com"><ICANN Responses to WS2 Jurisdiction Questions-SE.pdf></span><span id="cid:672DB86D72E2D04FAE1C1D558CD16C6C@verisign.com"><JurisdictionQuestiontoICANNLegalv2.doc (1).docx></span><span id="cid:7958E91DECF0414C9D9A19BEC921417E@verisign.com"><Employ Media LLC v ICANN_v2.docx></span><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">_______________________________________________</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><a href="mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org</a><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction</a></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>