[Ws2-jurisdiction] Third Draft of Experience Solicitation Questions

[Greg Shatan]

Jeff, I think your question is a good one.  I think you may be using DNS in
a more narrow way than the drafter intended, but we should clarify this
(which may mean revising the question somewhat).  I would say that DNS was
being used here to mean "domain name-related services," and not merely "DNS
services" of the type that could be offered by a "DNS service provider" --
but your reading is a logical one and others could take the same approach,
which would muddy the effort considerably.

Milton and Christopher, can you answer Jeff's question below?

On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>
wrote:

> I think I support this formulation, but can you please define what
> DNS-related services are.  If I missed this in a previous thread, I
> apologize.  But 90% of DNS-related services (in my opinion) are non-ICANN
> related (services like managed external DNS, internal DNS management, DDoS
> protection services, etc.)…..Those examples have very little if anything to
> do with ICANN.
>
>
>
> *Jeffrey J. Neuman*
>
> *Senior Vice President *|*Valideus USA* | *Com Laude USA*
>
> 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600
>
> Mclean, VA 22102, United States
>
> E: jeff.neuman at valideus.com or jeff.neuman at comlaude.com
>
> T: +1.703.635.7514 <(703)%20635-7514>
>
> M: +1.202.549.5079 <(202)%20549-5079>
>
> @Jintlaw
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-
> bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Rodenbaugh
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 6, 2016 10:20 PM
> *To:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Third Draft of Experience Solicitation
> Questions
>
>
>
> I support this formulation, thanks.
>
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
>
> RODENBAUGH LAW
>
> tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087 <(415)%20738-8087>
>
> http://rodenbaugh.com
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 6:58 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> All:
>
>
>
> Based on discussions on our last call and the list, I've revised these
> questions as follows (added text underlined).  Please reply to this email
> with any comments or suggested changes.
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> 1.       Has your business, your privacy or your ability to use or
> purchase DNS-related services been affected by ICANN's jurisdiction* in any
> way?
>
>
>
> If the answer is Yes, please describe specific cases, situations or
> incidents, including the date, the parties involved, and links to any
> relevant documents.  Please note that *“affected”* may *refer to *positive
> *and/*or negative *effects*.
>
>
>
> 2.       Has ICANN's jurisdiction* affected any dispute resolution process
> or litigation related to domain names you have been involved in?
>
>
>
> If the answer is Yes, please describe specific cases, situations or
> incidents, including the date, the parties involved, and links to any
> relevant documents.    Please note that *“affected”* may *refer to*
> positive *and/*or negative *effects*.
>
>
>
> 3.       Do you have copies of and/or links to any *verifiable* reports
> of experiences of other parties that would be responsive to the questions
> above?
>
>
>
> If the answer is yes, please provide these copies and/or links.
>
>
>
> _____________________________
>
>
>
> *  For these questions, “ICANN’s jurisdiction” refers to (a) ICANN being
> subject to U.S. and California law as a result of its incorporation and
> location in California, (b) ICANN being subject to the laws of any other
> country as a result of its location or contacts with that country, or (c)
> any “choice of law” or venue provisions in agreements with ICANN.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20161206/993acffe/attachment.html>