[Ws2-jurisdiction] [Issue and Solution] Seeking an OFAC License process

[Paul Rosenzweig]

That’s what I meant – OFAC is a regulatory process.  That’s hard, but it is a LOT easier than a legislative process which would be what is necessary for formal immunity from this law.

 

Paul

 

Paul Rosenzweig

 <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com

O: +1 (202) 547-0660

M: +1 (202) 329-9650

VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739

 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com

My PGP Key:  <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684

 

From: Mueller, Milton L [mailto:milton at gatech.edu] 
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2017 10:49 PM
To: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>
Cc: ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
Subject: RE: [Ws2-jurisdiction] [Issue and Solution] Seeking an OFAC License process

 

It’s not clear to me that a general license requires legislation. It might be something that the executive branch can do. Also, while getting recognition for a general license might take time, once it was done it would be done, whereas every individual application has to be handled again and again and again….

 

--MM

 

However lengthy the OFAC license application process, I am quite confident that seeking a legislative immunity solution in the US would be even lengthier ☹

 

Paul

 

Paul Rosenzweig

 <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com

O: +1 (202) 547-0660

M: +1 (202) 329-9650

VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739

 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com

My PGP Key:  <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684

 

From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org>  [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of farzaneh badii
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2017 10:36 AM
To: ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org> >
Subject: [Ws2-jurisdiction] [Issue and Solution] Seeking an OFAC License process

 

Seeking an OFAC license has been reported to be lengthy and not very transparent. Also as Mr. Rodenbaugh explained below, OFAC licenses are time-limited and require a periodic application. It can hamper registries/registrars businesses.

 ICANN has reportedly been untransparent about the application of OFAC license process. 

 

Solution: ICANN should commit to apply for an OFAC license and be transparent about the application process and its actions with regards to application. 

 

As to the lengthy nature of the process, perhaps attempting to receive a general OFAC license for ICANN functions would be a solution for all this. 

 

 


On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com <mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com> > wrote:

I agree with Jeff's proposal that ICANN be required to make a good faith application for OFAC license whenever it is necessary to fulfill the purpose of registry and/or registrar agreements.  And I support his 2d question, requesting details.  

 

Note that OFAC doesn't just hamper registries and registrars located or formed in sanctioned countries, but also registries and registrars with officers, directors or significant shareholders from any of the sanctioned countries (regardless where the business is located or formed).  Note further that OFAC licenses are time-limited, requiring periodic reapplication.  And ICANN legal has told me that they were not required to seek an OFAC license for my client, even though that client had executed registry agreements with ICANN.  I disputed that, and they got the license; but there is no guarantee they will seek it again when it expires, even though the registries are live.  

 

I can't see any good reason why ICANN should not be required at least to make a good faith effort to get a license.  It seems at least to be implied in the registry agreement anyway, via the covenant of good faith and fair dealing inherent in every contract (at least under California law).  If ICANN refused to seek a license, it would frustrate the purpose of the entire agreement.




Mike Rodenbaugh

RODENBAUGH LAW

tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087 <tel:(415)%20738-8087> 

http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/>  

 

 

 

Farzaneh

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170821/f8392313/attachment-0001.html>