Jurisdiction Meeting #35 (14 June 2017 @ 13:00 UTC)
- Brenda Brewer
Attendees
Sub-group Members: Andreea Brambilla, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Christopher Wilkinson, David McAuley, Erich Schweighofer, Farzaneh Badii, Greg Shatan, Herb Waye, Kavouss Arasteh, Parminder Singh, Paul McGrady, Philip Corwin, Steve DelBianco, Tatiana Tropina, Thiago Jardim, Thomas Rickert, Vidushi Marda, Wale Bakare
Observers/Guests: Garrett Hinck, Jonathan Peyster
Staff: Bernard Turcotte, Brenda Brewer, Nathalie Vergnolle
Apologies: Finn Petersen, Jorge Cancio, Avri Doria, Bartlett Morgan, Paul Rosenzweig
** If your name is missing from attendance or apology, please send note to acct-staff@icann.org **
Transcript
Recording
Agenda
1. Welcome
2. Review of Agenda
3. Administration
3.1. Changes to SOIs
3.2. Identify Audio Only and Phone Number Participants
4. Review of decisions and action items from last call (5 Minutes)
4.1. Decisions:
4.1.1. (none)
4.2. Action Items:
4.2.1. Staff to prepare form letter/email for rapporteur wrt to decision this week. – Draft forthcoming
4.2.2. GS – Circulate new draft of question to sub-group based on input from discussion prior to next meeting. – Charts of potential positions suggested on prior call was circulated June 11
5. Follow-Up on Scope Discussion (25 Minutes)
6. Review of ICANN Litigation (15 Minutes)
6.1. Commercial Connect v. ICANN (Greg Shatan)
6.2. Economic Solutions, Inc. v. ICANN (David McAuley)
6.3. Status of Outstanding Cases
7. Review of Questionnaire Responses (10 Minutes)
7.1. Response of Mohammad Reza Mousavi, Information Technology Organization of Iran, International department (Erich Schweighofer)
7.2. Status of Outstanding Reviews
8. AOB
9. Meetings Remaining Before ICANN59
9.1. Tuesday 20 June 1900 UTC
10. Adjourned
Raw Captioning Notes
Please note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official transcript will be posted 2-3 days after the call
- Word Doc
Decisions:
- Thomas Rickert for the CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs, We have concluded that the Jurisdiction sub-group will take Californian jurisdiction as a base line for all its recommendations, and that the sub-team not pursue recommendations to change ICANN's jurisdiction of incorporation, location of headquarters or seek immunity for ICANN. With this decision we are recognizing that there is no possibility that there would be consensus for an immunity based concept or a change of place of incorporation. As such I would establish in the minutes of this call that we focus on the solution that gets most traction. Recognizing that this does not eliminate, as I think Avri said during last week's call, that we can discuss all issues that might arise during the deliberations. But that we actually focus on the status quo being Californian law and place of incorporation. and work on solutions that are founded on this.
Action Items:
- (none)
Requests:
- (none)
Documents Presented
Chat Transcript
Brenda Brewer: (6/14/2017 07:52) Good day and welcome to Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #35 on 14 June 2017 @ 13:00 UTC!
Brenda Brewer: (07:52) If you are not speaking, please mute your phone by pressing *6 (star 6). To unmute press *6. This call is recorded.
Brenda Brewer: (07:52) Reminder to all, please state your name before speaking for the Captioner. Thank you!
Kavouss Arasteh: (07:55) tks
Pat-Captioner: (07:55) yes
Vidushi Marda: (07:59) Hi! I am in the adobe room now, thanks!
Brenda Brewer: (08:00) and your phone number ends with 6283, correct Vidushi?
Vidushi Marda: (08:00) yes!
Brenda Brewer: (08:00) Thank you! I've merged your name and phone number!
David McAuley (RySG): (08:00) I am no. 4154
Brenda Brewer: (08:00) Thank you David!
David McAuley (RySG): (08:01) Hi Thomas
Pat-Captioner: (08:02) Brenda, who is running this meeting?
Brenda Brewer: (08:03) Greg Shatan is the Speaker
Brenda Brewer: (08:03) I am the Staff Support
Pat-Captioner: (08:03) Thank you
Paul McGrady: (08:04) Good morning/afternoon/evening
Wale Bakare: (08:07) Hi all
Cheryl Langdon-OrrCLO: (08:08) sorry to be entering AC late
Herb Waye Ombuds: (08:08) Welcome to Canada Kavouss
Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (08:08) your sound comes through quite muffled
Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (08:08) That was for Greg
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:08) It is too low and not clear
Paul McGrady: (08:09) Greg, you are hard to hear
Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (08:09) Kavouss comes through loud and clearly
David McAuley (RySG): (08:09) not background
Farzaneh Badii: (08:09) I can hear Greg
Paul McGrady: (08:09) You are too low
Vidushi Marda: (08:09) greg your sound is very low
Farzaneh Badii: (08:09) but it might because I have magic ears!
Tatiana Tropina: (08:09) I can hear Greg perfectly
Andreea Brambilla: (08:09) I hear you ok, Greg.
David McAuley (RySG): (08:09) I hear Greg well but low
Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (08:10) sometimes sound quality varies depending on from where you sign into the adobe room
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:10) Bernie sound was good and clear but Greg's is still low
Wale Bakare: (08:10) I can hear Greg OK just an intermittent distortion in his vocie
Wale Bakare: (08:12) *voice
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:13) Greg ,may you pls speak more loudly
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:21) Greg I have raised my hand several times but it was put it down from there why?
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:21) @Kavouss - we are not doing that manually
Vidushi Marda: (08:22) The work plan, as discussed on 24th April is "the Subgroup will identify issues before it goes on to explore remedies"; "for each issue, the group will then look at proposed remedies"; "the group should not discuss a remedy until an issue has been identified that requires discussion of that remedy".. why do we have to preclude the scope at this time? What concrete case has prompted this?
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:22) @Kavouss your hand is up now
David McAuley (RySG): (08:22) I agree with Thomas and on scope continue to believe what I posted back in September in this email http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/2016-September/000099.html
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:22) and I will monitor that it stays up
Greg Shatan: (08:23) Here's what Thomas said: We take Californian jurisdiction as a base line for the recommendation, and that is the sub dream pursue recommendations to change ICANN's jurisdiction or headquarters are Corporation or seek immunity for ICANN. We are recognizing that there are no -- that there is no chance, if you look at various options that we have, that there would be consensus for an immunity based concept or a change of place of incorporation. And so I would establish in the minutes of this call that we focus on the solution that gets most traction. Recognizing that this does not eliminate, as I think Avri said during last week's call, that we can discuss all issues that might arise during the deliberations. But that we actually focus on the status quo being Californian law and place of incorporation. And California and work on solutions that are founded on this very recommendation.
Paul McGrady: (08:25) +1 Finding a way to give ICANN immunity would be the opposite of accountabliity. And accountability was the sole purpose of this CCWG in the first place.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:28) my goodness. we have been identifying the problems .... I thought that's what the questionnaires did.
Thiago Jardim: (08:29) I understand.
Thiago Jardim: (08:29) My reference to workplan is that it establishes we should look at ISSUES before REMEDIES.
Parminder: (08:30) Paul, that is your view. i think immunity is very workable with acct. mechanisms.
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:30) Kavouss should be next - seems to be having problems with his hand
Farzaneh Badii: (08:31) when we say immunity, are we talking about granting immunity to ICANN or certain functions of ICANN
Farzaneh Badii: (08:31) I think if there is a new angle to the immunity discussion, then we should discuss it
Parminder: (08:31) to me, sorry to observe, what i witness is an extra ordinary inteverention from ccwg co chairs and sub group chair to completely change the direction of this group. And this has come with littte basis that arises from group's work itself.
Herb Waye Ombuds: (08:32) I have to leave. Best regards all. Herb
Farzaneh Badii: (08:33) But i think first we have to see what the problems are and if the only solution is to grant immunity to ICANN . if in scope of this group
Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (08:34) Let me add to what I previously said that we are applying the same principles as we did during the CCWG work. We had multiple options many times during our work and we only pursued those that have a chance to reach consensus and not pursue further those who do not get sufficient traction to become a consensus recommendation. This is principle has been applied here.
Philip Corwin: (08:36) What some of us are witnessing is an extraordinary effort by a few members of this subgroup to impede its work by endlessly seeking to divert it to pursuit of an objective for which there is clearly no consensus supprot and which is arguably out of scope to begin with.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:36) yes we should look for solutions for OFAC problems
Parminder: (08:36) Thomas, i heard the basis, but dont see any of such stage was reached. For instance, how you decided immunity is not workable, even without any discussion?
Thiago Jardim: (08:36) David, we could have an independent external panel examine these issues and consider the panel's report.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:36) this group is like a Merry-go-round. we keep discussing the same issu which doesnt take us forward. with no amusement
Tatiana Tropina: (08:37) Agree that we have to look at OFAC solutions instead of taking at as a problem leading to relocation
Tatiana Tropina: (08:37) but sweeping OFAC under the rug won't do us any good.
David McAuley (RySG): (08:37) also low volume
Thiago Jardim: (08:37) Tatiana, yes, but what is preventing us from doing that now?
Paul McGrady: (08:37) Very hard to hear Parminder
Vidushi Marda: (08:38) tatiana - agree, why cant we do so now?
Farzaneh Badii: (08:39) we were doing it a couple of sessions ago, and then I don't know what happened. we went back to ICANN's headquarter locatio/ immunity/ group madate etc
Tatiana Tropina: (08:40) I think it's because different members of the group have different expectations from the OFAC discussion and other discussion. If we discuss it under the notion "ICANN stays in California, let's think what to do with OFAC (e.g. IGP proposed solutons)" is different to discussing this under the notion "OFAC is a problem let's relocate"
Thiago Jardim: (08:40) Jorge's proposal would allow us to resume our work
Greg Shatan: (08:40) Thanks, Tatiana. I guess the queestion is which dscussion will be more fruitful.
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:41) Time Check - 20 minutes to the top of the hour
Tatiana Tropina: (08:41) OFAC discussion can be very focused and can be all over the place, so I understand why mandate discussion preceeds - but I tend to agree with Farz as well that we are in circles.
Greg Shatan: (08:41) Thiago, don't you think Thomas's proposal also allows to resume our work?
Tatiana Tropina: (08:41) Greg, I think the discussion about mandate suffers from the same problem as possible OFAC discussion...
Philip Corwin: (08:41) This discussion is wasting another subgroup meeting and preventing us from making meaningful progress
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:41) pls do not put down my hand anymore
Farzaneh Badii: (08:41) agree with Phil
Thiago Jardim: (08:42) Greg, my objections were stated, as long as we examine remedies with a view to rejecting them now is premature
Farzaneh Badii: (08:42) I thought we agreed to accept ICANN jurisdiction location as is and discuss the problems. Avri suggested this and there was support
Thiago Jardim: (08:42) this is premature* and not necessary
Thiago Jardim: (08:43) We don't have to accept that ICANN will remain in California to discuss what the issues are arising from ICANN's being in California.
Greg Shatan: (08:43) Farzaneh, that is the case. This is essentially a second reading of the topic from last week's call.
Farzaneh Badii: (08:43) why are we doing a second reading? I am feeling dizzy going round the circle ...
Vidushi Marda: (08:44) I guess the reason we are going around in circles is this: during WS1, we were told that this would be addressed in WS2. Its a bit confusing to now be told that its off the table. As Thiago has rightly pointed out, lets not conflate issues with remedies. Why can't we take Jorge's suggestion of considering this problem on a case by case basis? Its too early to exclude issues.
Parminder: (08:44) i did not hear people suggesting alternative jursidictions as they like (for instance 200 jurisdictions)
Parminder: (08:44) they have been rather deliberate in what people recommend
Farzaneh Badii: (08:44) yes totally a shame if we dont spend time on substantive problems
Erich Schweighofer: (08:45) Accountability with immunity is the key question - not solved in international law or other jurisdictions
Parminder: (08:45) i dont think immunity is oppositie to acctabiltiy. and the chairs have no right to decide that for the group.
Parminder: (08:45) yes, immunity and accountability can be appropraitely combined
Erich Schweighofer: (08:47) It is possible but there is not much practice yet - immunity means no control by the host state
Thiago Jardim: (08:47) Enhancing ICANN's accountability includes its accountability to Governments, and as ICANN manages a common resource, leave it to the disproportionate influence of one State (whatever State that is) is opposite to ICANN's being fully accountable to Governments as a whole
Parminder: (08:47) Niether is there consensus to keep the status quo. this is important to understand and register.
Erich Schweighofer: (08:48) The question is enforcement of accountability .
Erich Schweighofer: (08:48) U.S. courts can do; others - not checked yet.
David McAuley (RySG): (08:50) yes - ok
Wale Bakare: (08:50) yes
Thiago Jardim: (08:51) Greg, I'll make my point here and would appreciate if you could read it and perhaps consider it: "why are we not discussing the impacts on ICANN's operations arising from it being located in the US?" - "why are we discussing remedies?" "we dont have to either reject or accept relocation to examine the impact"
David McAuley (RySG): (08:51) As for impact, I think the review of litigation cases gets at that
Farzaneh Badii: (08:52) and responses to questionnaires
Thiago Jardim: (08:52) Sorry, have to leave (I'm hoping to read the transcript and see my question in chat read out loud)
Farzaneh Badii: (08:52) we were discussing impact a couple of sessions ago. I don't know what happened.
Wale Bakare: (08:53) Exactly, the questionnaire was put in place to address that
Philip Corwin: (08:53) Sidley did not push us. Sidley worked at the direction of the CCWG
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:54) Time Check - 5 minutes to the top of the hour
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:57) Support from whom?
Greg Shatan: (08:57) In the interests of time, pls read Thiago's intervention as I won't have time to read it aloud.
Greg Shatan: (08:58) We take Californian jurisdiction as a base line for the recommendation, and that is the sub dream pursue recommendations to change ICANN's jurisdiction or headquarters are Corporation or seek immunity for ICANN. We are recognizing that there are no -- that there is no chance, if you look at various options that we have, that there would be consensus for an immunity based concept or a change of place of incorporation. And so I would establish in the minutes of this call that we focus on the solution that gets most traction. Recognizing that this does not eliminate, as I think Avri said during last week's call, that we can discuss all issues that might arise during the deliberations. But that we actually focus on the status quo being Californian law and place of incorporation. And California and work on solutions that are founded on this very recommendation.
Kavouss Arasteh: (08:58) Those people all coming from one single country or from millions of thers who are concwwrned on the matter
Parminder: (08:59) Thomas, it is simply not a procedural decision. It is a highly substantve one.
Parminder: (08:59) i object
Parminder: (08:59) unableto do red flag
Parminder: (08:59) OBJECTION
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (08:59) Noted
Parminder: (08:59) CANT DO RED FLAG
Thomas Rickert, CCWG Co-Chair: (09:00) Just to be clear, this is not a vote, but we will report objections to the plenary
Wale Bakare: (09:00) Can a recap of the suggestion be made?
Paul McGrady: (09:00) Unfortunately, I have to drop the call for another call that starts at the top of the hour. I hope that this group can find a way to move forward.
Kavouss Arasteh: (09:00) objection from kavouss
Farzaneh Badii: (09:00) I think there are three Greg
Farzaneh Badii: (09:00) Vidushi, Parminder and Kavouss
Tatiana Tropina: (09:00) Greg,three
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (09:01) 3 noted
Tatiana Tropina: (09:01) (not from me just the count)
Vidushi Marda: (09:01) there are three, and judging from thiago earlier maybe we put this on the list.
Cheryl Langdon-OrrCLO: (09:01) bye for mow then
Tatiana Tropina: (09:02) Bye for now. Thanks Thomas, thanks Greg and thanks all.
Parminder: (09:02) Yes thiago shd have been fore wanred of the impending vote
Erich Schweighofer: (09:02) Servus from London.
David McAuley (RySG): (09:02) Thanks Greg and staff, good bye all
Cheryl Langdon-OrrCLO: (09:02) bye
Wale Bakare: (09:02) Bye all
Vidushi Marda: (09:02) thanks.
Kavouss Arasteh: (09:02) I objected b
Bernard Turcotte Staff Support: (09:02) bye all
Farzaneh Badii: (09:02) bye.
Greg Shatan: (09:02) 4 objections noted.
Greg Shatan: (09:02) Bye all.
Greg Shatan: (09:02) Thanks!