[CCWG-ACCT] Declaration issued in the Booking.com v ICANN IRP

[Chris LaHatte]

The important issue arising is in 2 parts. Accountability and a general
sense is already being fully discussed. However the more difficult issue is
designing a dispute resolution system which has the flexibility to discuss
the issues graphically illustrated by this case. Do we want to set up a
quasi-judicial system within ICANN with a level of review or appeal? Should
we try and harmonise all of the existing review systems so that there is a
common procedure and a review/appeal level? There are many ad hoc panels,
some barely used and others heavily used. One of the purposes of such a
quasi-judicial tribunal/appeal system is that there are independent
arbitrators/review panels who can make objective decisions, as I suspect the
Independent Review Panel wanted, in the .hotel case. I don't think this has
been greatly discussed so far.

Chris LaHatte
Ombudsman
Blog  https://omblog.icann.org/
Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman


-----Original Message-----
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jeff
Neuman
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 4:55 PM
To: Phil Corwin
Cc: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Declaration issued in the Booking.com v ICANN IRP

It is also significant in that the panel actually shares a lot of the
concerns expressed by the  challenging party, but was powerless to do
anything because of the extremely limited mandate of the IRP.  This again
demonstrates the significance of the changes that were put in by the icann
staff and board "in the middle of the night" after the ICM decision when few
people other than the registries were paying attention (and ignored).

This accountability group must put back in place reasonable mechanisms that
do not leave impacted parties powerless to get relief especially where a
panel, like the one here, shares the concerns expressed by the challenger.  

Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 3, 2015, at 10:39 PM, Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> wrote:
> 
> I have not had a chance to review the entire 50-page document, but the 
> heart of the decision is at the Conclusion, Sections 141-147 on 
> pp.42-43. (decision attached)
> 
> The panel states that the limited nature of the current IRP means that any
complainant faces an “uphill battle” and “significant obstavles.> That is
especially true where, as here, the adopted policies and procedures are
followed, with no available recourse to contesting the soundness of those
policies and procedures.
> 
> The decision is a good example of the bounds of the current system. The
question is to what extent new accountability measures should make
challenges to Board actions less of an uphill battle, or provide a basis for
challenging the underlying policies and procedures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
> Virtualaw LLC
> 1155 F Street, NW
> Suite 1050
> Washington, DC 20004
> 202-559-8597/Direct
> 202-559-8750/Fax
> 202-255-6172/cell
> 
> Twitter: @VlawDC
> 
> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
> 
> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org 
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of 
> Samantha Eisner
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:06 PM
> To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Declaration issued in the Booking.com v ICANN IRP
> 
> ICANN received today the final declaration in the independent review
proceeding filed by Booking.com<http://Booking.com>. The declaration can be
found at
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-declaration-03mar15-en.pdf
.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Samantha
> ________________________________
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 2015.0.5751 / Virus Database: 4299/9218 - Release Date: 
> 03/03/15 
> <ICANN-ACCT-Bookingdotcom_IRP-final-declaration-03mar15-en.pdf>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5483 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150304/8e0617cd/smime.p7s>