...
Sub-group Members: Avri Doria, Becky Burr, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Christopher Wilkinson, David McAuley, Erich Schweighofer, Finn Petersen, Greg Shatan, Griffin Barnett, Herb Waye, Mathieu Weill, Philip Corwin, Seun Ojedeji, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Wale Bakare (15)
Observers/Guests: Taylor RW Bentley
Staff: Bernard Turcotte, Brenda Brewer, Karen Mulberry, Nigel Hickson (4)
Apologies: Paul McGrady, Matthew Shears
** If your name is missing from attendance or apology, please send note to acct-staff@icann.org **
Transcript
- Word Doc
Recording
Agenda
1. Welcome
2. Review of Agenda
3. Administration
a) Changes to SOIs
b) Questions to ICANN Legal – Status
4. Questionnaire Update
a) Status of current responses – no new responses
b) Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team
i) Responsibilities
(1) Updating the Subgroup on new responses and their status at each meeting
(2) Proposing an evaluation framework for responses
(a) Responses received will help guide creation of evaluation framework
(b) To be approved by the Subgroup
ii) Mail list to be created
iii) Meeting to be scheduled – Doodle poll to follow
5. Review of ICANN’s Past and Current Litigation (45 minutes)
a) Review of Sign-up sheet
b) Review of Summary Sheet
c) Review of Summaries
i) Verisign, Inc. v. ICANN V2 – MW
ii) State of Arizona vs NTIA V2 - MW
iii) Ben Haim v. Iran – MW
6. AOB
7. Adjourn
Notes (includes relevant text from chat):
13 Participants at start of call
1. Welcome
2. Review of Agenda
Greg Shatan - (no objections)
3. Administration
a) Changes to SOIs (none)
b) Questions to ICANN Legal – Status (awaiting response)
4. Questionnaire Update
a) Status of current responses – no new responses
b) Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team
i) Responsibilities
(1) Updating the Subgroup on new responses and their status at each meeting
(2) Proposing an evaluation framework for responses
(a) Responses received will help guide creation of evaluation framework
Christopher Wilkinson - I responded but my name does not seem to have been accepted.
Greg Shatan - will add.
(b) To be approved by the Subgroup
ii) Mail list to be created
iii) Meeting to be scheduled – Doodle poll to follow
5. Review of ICANN’s Past and Current Litigation
a) Review of Sign-up sheet (document)
Greg Shatan - (no changes)
b) Review of Summary Sheet (document)
c) Review of Summaries
i) Verisign, Inc. v. ICANN V2 – MW
Mathieu Weill - (presentation of summary sheet). Did not feel comfortable filling in the "choice of law/gov. law" field.
Becky Burr - ICANN used to put in a choice of law claue in its contracts which it does not do anymore.
ii) State of AZ vs NTIA V2 - MW
Mathieu Weill - (presentation of summary sheet). Did not feel comfortable filling in the "choice of law/gov. law" field.
Greg Shatan - did the court rule on the jurisdiction argument (MW - no mention of it). Any questions? (none).
iii) Ben Haim v. Iran – MW
Mathieu Weill - (presentation of summary sheet). Did not feel comfortable filling in the "choice of law/gov. law" field.
Becky Burr: there was a long discussion in the cases regarding which attachment law (state) applied
Becky Burr: DC or California
Mathieu Weill: I'll check the case and extract the relevant parts
Becky Burr: not WOULD have, but potentially could have
Becky Burr: because the plaintiffs sought the attachment in DC
David McAuley (RySG): just getting wind of this discussion - in the case on screen I think coutrt applied DC law which is a tad unusual on attachment
Becky Burr: so the plaintiff controlled here
Becky Burr: yes, David, you and I are on the same wavelength
Greg Shatan - should we add a field to the form about alternate jurisdictions.
Mathieu Weill - Do not think we should theorize about this - we just do our analysis and then look at statistics they yield.
Becky Burr: correct Mattieu
David McAuley (RySG): good point @Mathieu
Greg Shatan - Agree we should not do studies beyond what is provided in the materials.
6. AOB
Greg Shatan - (none)
7. Adjourn
Greg Shatan - Adjourned.
Decisions (none)
Action Items:
- Staff-GS – Add Christopher Wilkinson to Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team
- Staff to create email address for Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team
- Staff-GS To send doodle poll to arrange for a meeting of the Questionnaire Review/Evaluation Team
Documents Presented
- Form_Jurisdiction case Verisign vs ICANN_v2
- Form_Jurisdiction case Arizona State vs NTIA_v2
- Form_Jurisdiction case Ben Haim vs Iran
Chat Transcript
Brenda Brewer:Good day all and welcome to Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #24 on 28 March 2017 @ 19:00 UTC!
Brenda Brewer:This meeting will be recorded. Please mute your phone when not speaking by pressing *6 (star 6) *6 will also unmute.
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:Hello all
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:Thanks for joining us at 6AM Cheryl
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):this time of day is easy Bernie
Mathieu Weill:Hello !
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):hi Mathieu
Herb Waye Ombuds:Hello all
CW:Good evening all, Christopher
Mathieu Weill:OMG, meeting #24...
Nigel Hickson:good evening
Philip Corwin:That's me Greg 5316
CW:Could staff please recall where are the translations of the questionnaire.
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:Correct
Brenda Brewer:https://community.icann.org/x/UpXRAw
Brenda Brewer:See above link for questionnaire.
Mathieu Weill:Let's call the team Q
Greg Shatan:Jean Deaux?
Becky Burr:it would have been either California or Virginia, but
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:email from David McAuley - 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.
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:Time Check - 30 minutes left in call
David McAuley (RySG):I am now on call - in Brussels but having hard timne connecting
Greg Shatan:David, welcome.
David McAuley (RySG):thanks Greg, cant hear anything though
David McAuley (RySG):will check my system
Mathieu Weill:Come on, Becky, what you say is always interesting
Mathieu Weill:Even what you dont" say
Becky Burr:there was a long discussion in the cases regarding which attachment law (state) applied
Becky Burr:DC or California
David McAuley (RySG):i just got audio back
Mathieu Weill:I'll check the case and extract the relevant parts
Becky Burr:not WOULD have, but potentially could have
Becky Burr:because the plaintiffs sought the attachment in DC
David McAuley (RySG):just getting wind of this discussion - in the case on screen I think coutrt applied DC law which is a tad unusual on attachment
Becky Burr:so the plaintiff controlled here
Becky Burr:yes, David, you and I are on the same wavelength
CW:For those of us who do not regularly follow the court cases, the exercise is very educational ,
Mathieu Weill:+1 CW
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):indeed it is I am finding it very valuable....
Becky Burr:correct Mattieu
David McAuley (RySG):good point @Mathieu
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:Time Check - 15 minutes left in call
Mathieu Weill:Fair shot Greg !
Mathieu Weill:I will check back and report on list
Mathieu Weill:I promise after the Pool case, you won't hear me any more ;-)
David McAuley (RySG):Will do - I promised toi take two more and will do my best to get those out by early in week
avri doria:i thnk it is great.
David McAuley (RySG):I promised to do two more and will do best to get them out by Moiinday
avri doria:and i promise to do mine as soon as i can
CW:Will the completed forms be archived on the wiki?
avri doria:do we have a drive template for these case thingies?
avri doria:or do i make one by deleting from someone elses after i copy it over.
David McAuley (RySG):oh joy
Mathieu Weill:There is a template Avri
Mathieu Weill:The link is somewhere...
avri doria:will find it.
avri doria:thanks
Mathieu Weill:As the ancients say, "it's in the wiki"
avri doria:yeah, just knowing something is there, is often all the clue one needs.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):thanks everyone... bye for now...
avri doria:bye
Mathieu Weill:Thank you Greg !
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support:bye all
Wale Bakare:Thanks, bye
Becky Burr:bye
David McAuley (RySG):Thanks and bye all
CW:B'ye.