<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 07 April 2016 11:46 PM,
      Seth M Reiss wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
      cite="mid:004c01d190f9$8c5e9400$a51bbc00$@reiss@lex-ip.com"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
      <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered
        medium)">
      <style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
        {font-family:"Cambria Math";
        panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Calibri;
        panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Tahoma;
        panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Verdana;
        panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {margin:0in;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
        color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:blue;
        text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:purple;
        text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
        {mso-style-priority:34;
        margin-top:0in;
        margin-right:0in;
        margin-bottom:0in;
        margin-left:.5in;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
        color:black;}
span.EmailStyle17
        {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
        font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
        color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
        {mso-style-type:export-only;
        font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
        {size:8.5in 11.0in;
        margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
        {page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
        {mso-list-id:1170750392;
        mso-list-type:hybrid;
        mso-list-template-ids:1124657066 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
        {mso-level-tab-stop:none;
        mso-level-number-position:left;
        text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
        {margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
        {margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Two
            observations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoListParagraph"
          style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><span
              style="mso-list:Ignore">1.<span style="font:7.0pt
                &quot;Times New Roman&quot;">       </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"> What
            is to stop a non-US court from taking a similar enforcement
            action against a registrar within that country and seizing
            domains? <br>
          </span></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    None.... Any company is in any case subject to the jurisdiction of
    its incorporation.... So, what you are saying IMHO is completely
    besides the point. The issue that I am framing is 'why should a
    company that intended to do and have no business with the US be
    subject to US enforcement action?'<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
      cite="mid:004c01d190f9$8c5e9400$a51bbc00$@reiss@lex-ip.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoListParagraph"
          style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">
            Non-US courts have been known to take jurisdiction over
            business outside their countries based upon the business’s
            goods and services being accessible within the country
            through the Internet.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoListParagraph"
          style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><span
              style="mso-list:Ignore">2.<span style="font:7.0pt
                &quot;Times New Roman&quot;">       </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Cannot
            the non-US business that conducts itself legally within the
            laws of its country register its domains with a non-US
            registrar?</span></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Right.... So you are inter alia saying/ accepting that if a business
    really wants to avoid being subject to US jurisdiction, which it has
    a right to, it should never apply for and get a gTLD for itself.....
    Because gTLDs are directly registered with ICANN, a US based
    corporation, subject fully to US jurisdiction...<br>
    <br>
    It is such a pity that we can are ready to accept such a situation -
    for a non US business, if it has to avoid extraterritorial
    application of US jurisdiction, it should avoid taking a gTLD for
    itself... Or, to put it other way, the facility of getting a gTLD
    gets closed to that business...<br>
    <br>
    I dont think this is any way to run a global governance
    establishment, and to run a group - ALAC - that is supposed to make
    such an establishment more fair and democratic for all..<br>
    <br>
    This is quite a self damning admission...<br>
    <br>
    parminder <br>
    <blockquote
      cite="mid:004c01d190f9$8c5e9400$a51bbc00$@reiss@lex-ip.com"
      type="cite">
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoListParagraph"
          style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">I
            do not deny there is an uneven playing field because ICANN
            is more easily subject to US jurisdiction and law than the
            jurisdictions and laws of other countries, but your
            arguments may go too far.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Seth<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
            1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
            <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:windowtext">
                <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org">at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a>
                [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org">mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a>] <b>On
                  Behalf Of </b>parminder<br>
                <b>Sent:</b> Thursday, April 07, 2016 6:32 AM<br>
                <b>To:</b> McTim<br>
                <b>Cc:</b> At-Large Worldwide<br>
                <b>Subject:</b> Re: [At-Large] R: R: Is ICANN's
                oversight really moving away from the US government?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">McTim
            / All<br>
            <br>
            (Sorry for the delay in the response. I was travelling.)<br>
            <br>
            So, you say that the problem is only in my head, and we can
            safely ignore all that I am proposing as a problem! Let me
            then produce some clear evidence of the problem, and see how
            you respond to it.<br>
            <br>
            You of course know that US authorities have been using US
            based registries to frequently seize domains, for all kinds
            of reasons. Dont tell me you dont! The first famous case was
            when the domain of a travel site based in an European
            country was seized for offering holidays in Cuba to a
            customer in another European country, because US entities
            are banned from commercial transactions with Cuba. Note that
            the transaction had nothing at all to do with anything US.
            But US authorities used the US registration of the registry<a
              moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://arstechnica.com/business/2008/03/us-interferes-with-travel-to-cuba/">
              to seize the website nonetheless</a>. <br>
            <br>
            Next <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/10252412910/homeland-security-seizes-spanish-domain-name-that-had-already-been-declared-legal.shtml">famous
              case was of the Spanish sports streaming website
              Rojadirecta</a> whose legality had been tested in Spanish
            courts and it had been declared legal... But that mattered
            two hoots to US government agencies which used its US
            registration to seize it....<br>
            <br>
            Later has been <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://blog.easydns.org/2012/02/29/verisign-seizes-com-domain-registered-via-foreign-registrar-on-behalf-of-us-authorities/">this
              case of a Canadian gambling site</a> being seized
            similarly by US agencies. Earlier, <a
              moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.cnet.com/news/swiss-bank-in-wikileaks-case-abruptly-abandons-lawsuit/">wikileaks
              website had got seized</a>. <br>
            <br>
            There have been many more cases of <a
              moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.thedomains.com/2010/07/01/feds-seize-9-domains-for-copyright-infringement-but-based-on-what-law/">such
              domain name seizures by US authorities</a>, quite often
            when the focus of the concerned companies was non US. 
            Interesting, there have been court orders which <a
              moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/06/millions-of-dymanic-dns-users-suffer-after-microsoft-seizes-no-ip-domains/">transferred
              control over domain names of businesses to other, US,
              companies</a>. <br>
            <br>
            All such legal enforcement by US agencies ( courts as well
            as executive agencies)  has been got done through exercise
            of jurisdiction over US based registries, mostly Verisign
            controlling .com.<br>
            <br>
            Lets now move on to the times of thousands of gTLDs, made
            possible by the new gTLDs rounds,  and every big business
            encouraged to, at least legitimately entitled to, have its
            own gTLD.<br>
            <br>
            What if the above non US companies, or similar ones like
            them, now take on gTLDs of their own, which they have a
            right to. What is the option now for US agencies if they
            mean to pursue similar enforcement acts as they did earlier.
            And there simply is no reason why they wont.  Now, get this
            one thing clearly - for an US agency, there is absolutely no
            difference at all between a Verisign controlling .com
            registrations or an ICANN controlling gTLDs. *They are the
            same for them, US registered private entities, subject fully
            to US jurisdiction.*<br>
            <br>
            When they want, US agencies (courts and executive agencies)
            will similarly order ICANN, like they did earlier to
            Verisign, to take down the 'offending' gTLDs.... The logic
            is clear and simple, and irrefutable. Can anyone argue why
            and how they would not.... And that precisely is the problem
            that I have been positing, taking the very likely example of
            an Indian generic drug company, with a gTLD, falling foul of
            the US pharma industry's high Intellectual property
            aspirations and standards (which are not global). <br>
            <br>
            So, in the circumstances, the option for non US businesses
            is one of the two<br>
            <br>
            1. They keep strictly on the right side of US law, even when
            their business does not have anything to do with the US.
            This amounts to a global enforcement of one country's law
            and jurisdiction, covering all kinds of areas. This is
            highly undemocratic, and not should not be acceptable to non
            US entities.  <br>
            <br>
            2. Non US companies play safe and do not take up new gTLDs.
            This amounts to a virtual denial of a key DNS service to non
            US companies. Which should be almost equally unacceptable. <br>
            <br>
            What is your response to this situation... If this is not a
            real problem for an organisation whose main task is to
            provide DNS services to the world, I dont see what would be
            a problem for it. And if this is not an issue for ALAC to
            address, whose main purpose should be to the serve the
            interests of more the peripheral groups on DNS related
            issues, I dont know what would be?<br>
            <br>
            Since I have put forth clear evidence and propositions
            logically ensuing from such evidence, I will very much
            appreciate clear and direct responses, to the issues I raise
            and the 'problem' I frame.<br>
            <br>
            parminder <br>
            <br>
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal">On Tuesday 29 March 2016 08:53 PM, McTim
            wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
        </div>
        <blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
              <div>
                <p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:26 AM,
                  parminder &lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
                    target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>&gt;
                  wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><span
                      style="font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;"><br>
                      <br>
                      <br>
                      What amazes me in all the responses I am getting
                      is that no one is either saying that the problem I
                      have posed does not exist or it is not important
                      to resolve, nor providing any alternative ways to
                      resolve it.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
                  1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
                  6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span
                        style="font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">They
                        are just arguing with parts of my proposal,
                        which is fine, although I think, while no doubt
                        this is a somewhat complex solution to a complex
                        problem, no one has been able to show why it
                        really cant work. <br>
                        <br>
                        To remind; the problem I had posed was about the
                        very likely wrongful US's jurisdictional
                        imposition on ICANN's process and vis a vis the
                        root server maintainer. I had given a concrete
                        example; of a US court pushing the well-known
                        over-zealous US intellectual property law and
                        enforcement to take away the gTLD of an Indian
                        generic drug manufacturer even when the latter
                        has no direct business interests or activities
                        in the US... What is your response to such a
                        very likely occurrence? </span><o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">It is highly unlikely, the
                    likelihood approaching zero IMHO.<o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
                  1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
                  6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span
                        style="font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Should
                        we simply ignore it?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">yes, it is safe to do so. 
                    However, you must realise that after the IANA
                    transition is finished, there will be absolutely
                    zero appetite inside ICANN to make major reforms.  I
                    doubt you could get that Community to even consider
                    such a proposal. <o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
                  1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
                  6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span
                        style="font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Or,
                        do you not think it likely, in which case lets
                        discuss that</span><o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">If we must.  Let's say that your
                    scenario comes to pass.  You do realise that ICANN
                    would use the hundreds of millions of dollars in its
                    legal kitty to fight such a court order, right?  <o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
                  1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
                  6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span
                        style="font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">....
                        You cannot simply not respond to this key global
                        governance problem that stares us in the face...
                        (Apart from it, is the less likely but still to
                        be remained prepared for possibility of the The
                        Office of Foreign Assets Control of the US
                        playing hanky panky with the gTLD of a country</span><o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">countries don't have gTLDs.<o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
                  1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
                  6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span
                        style="font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">that
                        the US gets into serious enmity with.... every
                        country likes to remain prepared for such an
                        eventuality. You cannot deny them that right.
                        )...<br>
                        <br>
                        No one seems to want to address these key global
                        governance problems. Do they not exist? If they
                        do, then what is your response to and
                        preparedness for these?  </span><o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">They are not key.  They exist as
                    a problem largely in your head.  <o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                </div>
              </div>
              <div>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
              </div>
              <p class="MsoNormal">-- <o:p></o:p></p>
              <div>
                <p class="MsoNormal">Cheers,<br>
                  <br>
                  McTim<br>
                  "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates
                  where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon
                  Postel<o:p></o:p></p>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </blockquote>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>