[Ws2-jurisdiction] Agenda for Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #24

Wed Mar 29 14:03:33 UTC 2017

I agree that the gaps are unbridgeable.  I recommend we close this subgroup
with a report to the full plenary that there is nothing approaching
consensus on how to move forward and that, as a result, we will bring no
recommendations or report to the plenary

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] On Behalf Of parminder
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 4:13 AM
To: ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Agenda for Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #24

Colleagues,

Excuse my disappointed tone, but I am unable to get a fix on what direction
are we headed right now, or whether we are moving at all .

We seem to have laid all our hope on some legalistic pursuits, which happen
to be of a kind with known outcomes. On one side we have sent out a
questionnaire with an exceedingly narrow remit of seeking past occurrences
where ICANN's US jurisdiction may have come in conflict with ICANN's
working. All of these instances are very widely known and discussed, and
whatever inferences each of us makes out of them is what we make out of
them. Though these differences and their rationales can be discussed here.
There is not going to any case of some guy from deep Indian jungles suddenly
coming out with a story of an old illicit liaison with ICANN, which will
then open our eyes to something very new. Whom are we kidding, other than
ourselves, all the cases that exist are know - quite well known. If we want
to, we can discuss them. But this waiting for godot isnt going to be of any
use.

If some people believe that this exercise is going to make us able to say;
well, we looked everywhere, and we found no proof that US jurisdiction of
ICANN has any (or any substantial) implication for ICANN's policy making
processes, that is simply plain silly. That is not going to happen. Our
differences here are not about some unknown historical facts, but about
facts that we all mutually know, and our respective inferences from them. 

Similarly, we have referred to ICANN legal issues of jurisdiction and
jurisprudence that are so obvious and simple that even a non lawyer like me
is pretty clear about them. In any case, there is enough literature out
there on how courts exercise jurisdiction, and what trumps what, and so on.
There is no way that this exercise is going to come up with some kind of
proof that US jurisdiction is only as much applicable over ICANN as any
other jurisdiction, or that even if ICANN was incorporated elsewhere, or had
judicial immunity, the US jurisdiction will still have same kind of powers
over ICANN as it does now. 

I think we should stop shadow boxing, and get on with real tasks. 

IMHO, this group is mostly not able to decide what to do, knowing that the
differences of opinions (and excuse me to say, interests) are very wide, and
also very basic. And therefore we are simply trying to look like keeping
busy. I dont think this is a very productive use of people's time. 

Does anyone have any bright idea about how we can wrap this all up...

parminder

On Wednesday 29 March 2017 12:58 AM, McAuley, David via Ws2-jurisdiction
wrote:

My apologies to group and Greg for absence - I intended to attend the call
but am at present in a Hilton Hotel in Brussels where the internet access
has been abysmal - until just a few minutes ago. Will ry to join now.

David

David McAuley

International Policy Manager

Verisign Inc.

703-948-4154

From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org
<mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org>
[mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 12:44 PM
To: ws2-jurisdiction  <mailto:ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
<ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Ws2-jurisdiction] Agenda for Jurisdiction Subgroup
Meeting #24

All:

Here is the agenda for the upcoming Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting at 19:00
UTC today.

Greg

Greg Shatan
C: 917-816-6428
S: gsshatan
Phone-to-Skype: 646-845-9428
 <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com> gregshatanipc at gmail.com

_______________________________________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org <mailto: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/20170329/0edbca50/attachment.html>