[Iana-ipr] Proposed Process for Executing Agreements

Jorge Contreras contreraslegal at att.net
Tue Sep 27 22:08:29 CEST 2016

I thought we already discussed the simultaneous signature by all and
exchange of PDF signature pages.  This method is fine under the agreements
and when we asked, nobody raised an objection under local law. So this
method would work and is better than scanning the same document multiple
times in succession.

On 9/27/16, 1:43 PM, "Alissa Cooper" <iana-ipr-bounces at nro.net on behalf
of alissa at cooperw.in> wrote:

>Ray, Sam, does signing in parallel work for you? If so, and if we hear
>back from you before Wednesday¹s call, I think we can cancel the call
>since this is the main item we would need to discuss. Please advise.
>> On Sep 27, 2016, at 2:25 PM, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at afrinic.net>
>>> On 27 Sep 2016, at 22:13, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I haven't seen any responses to this, so I'm curious how this is being
>>> In the interests of time, it might make sense to sign in counterparts
>>>(i.e., each signatory signs on its own sheet of paper), rather than in
>>>sequence.  This will be legally effective.  Signatories can always
>>>execute on a single document later on, for posterity.  (In other words,
>>>this should be signed in parallel, rather than serially.)
>> I agree with signing in parallel.  The documents explicitly allow this;
>>for example, clause 7.9 of the Commuity Agreement says:
>> 7.9       Counterparts.  This Agreement may be executed in two or more
>>counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall
>>constitute together the same document.
>> Alan Barrett
>> _______________________________________________
>> Iana-ipr mailing list
>> Iana-ipr at nro.net
>> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr
>Iana-ipr mailing list
>Iana-ipr at nro.net

More information about the Iana-ipr mailing list