[Ws2-jurisdiction] OFAC Recommendation -- Further Suggested Revisions

[Arasteh]

Dear Paul
Thank you very much for your comments
I am open to soften the text as you suggested e.g. to replace " prove " by " determine" and the term"must" be a less stronger term such as" need" which is between must/ shall/ and may
However, due to the fact that we are severely affected  by the process, may I humbly request you to kindly agree to retain the idea with slightly modified text to also be agreeable to you.
I am jerky awaiting to receive your fair suggestion as soon possible
Regards
Kavouss

Sent from my iPhone

> On 19 Sep 2017, at 02:16, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
> 
> All
>  
> Given the lateness with which we received Kavouss’s suggested paragraph and revisions and the fact that I, regretfully, could not make the call, let me note my disagreement with two aspects of it:
>  
> First, on page 5, it is suggested that a survey be undertaken to “prove” that non-US registrars are imposing OFAC requirements.  Since the point of the survey is to determine what is true, it is premature to assume that it will “prove” the facts assumed by the proposer.  The word “prove” is therefore in error and should be replaced by “determent whether”
>  
> Second, I oppose the proposed new paragraph at the end simply because, as written, I have absolutely no idea what is meant.  But use of terms like “must” as an imperative are always inappropriate in recommendations.  Insofar as I can discern the intent (that there is some action being taken by registries against registrants) that issue is a new one that needs to be fully discussed and it is, of course, quite different from the OFAC general license idea for ICANN that we have been discussing (which would only relate to ICANN’s on RAA agreements).
>  
> Paul
>  
> Paul Rosenzweig
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
> www.redbranchconsulting.com
> My PGP Key: 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 Greg Shatan
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 2:13 PM
> To: ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] OFAC Recommendation -- Further Suggested Revisions
>  
> CORRECTED VERSION ATTACHED.  A paragraph suggested by Kavouss, which is in the Google Doc, did not show up in the Word document (nor in the PDF, which is based on the Word doc).  Corrected versions are attached. Thank you to Kavouss for catching this.  Please see the last paragraph in the document so that you can review this suggested text.
>  
> Also, some crossed-out text at the very end that was supposed to be deleted (as noted on last week's call) has now been deleted from the attached (and the Google Doc).
>  
> Greg
>  
>  
>  
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>  
> I have attached a further revised OFAC Recommendation, reflecting changes suggested by Kavouss Arasteh and Seun Ojedeji.  Word and PDF versions are attached, and the Google Doc reflects these suggested changes as well.
>  
> I look forward to our call.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Greg
>  
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170919/e33422bf/attachment.html>