[NRO-IANAXFER] ianaxfer Digest, Vol 4, Issue 25

Shiva Upadhyay shiva.upadhyay at yahoo.com
Thu Jan 8 14:32:32 CET 2015


Hi,
1) I agree with suggestion floating regarding selection criteria and process should be same as  NRO NC/ ASO AC. Please add this change in the second draft. 
2) I know AOC related issues we are discussing in Accountability Track but please add something in this regard so that second draft will provide more clear view for individuals who are only working or following number community response.
The loop of NTIA<->ICANN<->DOC<->NTIA; how it will work in future which organisation/s will cover which role in future? Request: Please add few lines in the end or provide a picture in differentiating form.

Regards,Shiva Upadhyay 

     On Thursday, 8 January 2015 3:51 PM, "ianaxfer-request at nro.net" <ianaxfer-request at nro.net> wrote:
   

 Send ianaxfer mailing list submissions to
    ianaxfer at nro.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    ianaxfer-request at nro.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
    ianaxfer-owner at nro.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ianaxfer digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: CRISP Team 9th teleconference video (Justine Lera)
  2. Webex information CRISP Team 10th Teleconference    Friday
      January 9th 2015 13:00 UTC (German Valdez)
  3. Re: Contract details (Richard Hill)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 08:32:39 +0100
From: Justine Lera <justien at gmail.com>
To: Martin <martin at lacnic.net>
Cc: "ianaxfer at nro.net" <ianaxfer at nro.net>, "crisp at nro.net"
    <crisp at nro.net>
Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] CRISP Team 9th teleconference video
Message-ID: <465931D0-7E20-4277-9138-5BD4935FF174 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hallo Martin,

Thank-you for your work on this.
Could you include the weblinks, going forward?

Cheers,
Justine

> On 07.01.2015, at 17:57, Martin <martin at lacnic.net> wrote:
> 
> Hello everyone.
> The video and the audio from the 9th meeting are now available online.
> Regards,
> Martin (on behalf of the NRO secretariat).
> 
> -- 
> <bjgehhgf.png> Mart?n Ma?ana
> Webmaster
>    & Designer
> # 4204
> <ebjhgdci.png> Casa de Internet de
> Latinoam?rica y el Caribe
> Rambla Rep. de M?xico 6125
> 11400 Montevideo-Uruguay
> +598 2604 22 22 www.lacnic.net 
> _______________________________________________
> ianaxfer mailing list
> ianaxfer at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/attachments/20150108/ed845c03/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 19:21:58 +1000
From: German Valdez <german at nro.net>
To: <ianaxfer at nro.net>, <crisp at nro.net>
Subject: [NRO-IANAXFER] Webex information CRISP Team 10th
    Teleconference    Friday January 9th 2015 13:00 UTC
Message-ID: <B4CAA657-FA73-4EC3-A64E-0560ED1E4F80 at nro.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


Hi

Please find below webex information for the CRISP Team 10th Teleconference to be held on Friday January 9th 2015 at 13:00

Regards

German Valdez
NRO 

 
CRISP Team 10th Teleconference
Friday, January 9, 2015
1:00 pm  |  UTC |  1 hr
 
Join WebEx meeting <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/j.php?MTID=mc4a4ca46dd9edc1f69852ffb3cea3533>
Meeting number:    704 117 664
Meeting password:    crispteam
 
Join by phone
0800-051-3810 Call-in toll-free number (UK)
+44-203-478-5289 Call-in toll number (UK)
Access code: 704 117 664
Global call-in numbers <https://ripencc.webex.com/ripencc/globalcallin.php?serviceType=MC&ED=359013747&tollFree=1>  |  Toll-free calling restrictions <http://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf>
 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/attachments/20150108/30f7db20/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:21:40 +0100
From: "Richard Hill" <rhill at hill-a.ch>
To: "Pindar Wong" <pindar.wong at gmail.com>, "John Curran"
    <jcurran at arin.net>
Cc: ianaxfer at nro.net
Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] Contract details
Message-ID: <GLEAIDJPBJDOLEICCGMNCEKHCPAA.rhill at hill-a.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

There are two separate issues here: (1) what substantive law applies to the contract and (2) how disputes would be resolved.  The current MoU addresses (2): arbitration in Bermuda.  It does not address (1): if there were a dispute, the arbitration panel would have to decide what law to apply.

Regarding (1), the bit "or other such location as agreed between the NRO and ICANN" is not actually necessary, because the parties to an arbitration can always voluntarily agree to change the seat of arbitration.

Regarding (2), a choice of substantive law is usually found in contracts, because otherwise significant legal fees will be incurred, if a case goes to arbitration, just to argue which law should apply.

So I would strongly recomment that the future contract include an explicit choice of law clause.

Regarding the UDRP providers and arbitrators, I don't think that they are directly relevant in this context: they were chosen for experise regarding trademark and domain name disputes, not general expertise regarding commercial disputes.  However, some of the providers do provide general dispute resolution services, and some of the UDRP arbitrators are also active as general commercial arbitrators.  The question here is whether the new contract should refer to some specific list of arbitrators, rather than just referring to a provider such as ICC, which has its own list.

Best,
Richard
  -----Original Message-----
  From: ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net [mailto:ianaxfer-bounces at nro.net]On Behalf Of Pindar Wong
  Sent: jeudi, 8. janvier 2015 07:52
  To: John Curran
  Cc: ianaxfer at nro.net
  Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] Contract details






  On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:52 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

    On Jan 7, 2015, at 3:03 PM, Pindar Wong <pindar.wong at gmail.com> wrote:



      Not a lawyer, but FWIW  keep in view this structure for ICANN's existing list of arbitrators:- 

      https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/providers-6d-2012-02-25-en


    Pindar - 

      You are going to have to be more specific with respect to ?keep in view 
      this structure for ICANN?s existing list of arbitrators"


      Are you indicating that you feel that a contract from address community
      for IANA operator services for the central number registries (i.e. RFC 7249)
      should somehow consider ICANN?s list of Uniform Domain Name Dispute
      resolution providers?  If so, could you explain why you believe the list is 
      relevant to the CRISP team efforts, and how it should impact the effort?


    Without such explanation, it is quite unclear how the CRISP team should
    consider your input...


  Sorry John for the confusion... you were recounting what you remembered w.r.t. the selection criteria of Bermuda for arbitration. 

  It's been a while but from what I recall there was also the 'other option' in the Arbitration bit that the CRISP team might need to consider.


  Emphasis mine:-
  http://archive.icann.org/en/aso/aso-mou-29oct04.htm

    In the event that the NRO is in dispute with ICANN relating to activities described in this MoU, the NRO shall arrange arbitration via ICC rules in the jurisdiction of Bermuda or such other location as is agreed between the NRO and ICANN. The location of the arbitration shall not decide the laws to be applied in evaluating this agreement or such dispute.




    https://aso.icann.org/documents/memorandums-of-understanding/nro-memorandum-of-understanding/ 


    arrange arbitration via ICC rules in the jurisdiction of Bermuda, or such other location as is unanimously agreed upon by each of the parties to the arbitration.


  The point that I was trying to make to the CRISP team, when it considers the seat of jurisdiction issue, keep in view, if it wishes to retain a  'such other location as agreed', that it might be helpful to figure out beforehand how it might come to the agreement of this non-Bermuda jurisdiction.  If so, then it might be helpful to consider the ICANN UDRP dispute resolution providers as a starting point.  This list of arbitrators were selected again some criteria, which may not be relevant for your purposes, but it's just a starting point.


  Hope that helps.

  p.






  



    Thanks!
    /John


    John Curran
    President and CEO
    ARIN







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/attachments/20150108/cb18fc38/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
ianaxfer mailing list
ianaxfer at nro.net
https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer


End of ianaxfer Digest, Vol 4, Issue 25
***************************************


   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/ianaxfer/attachments/20150108/e548eed2/attachment.html>


More information about the ianaxfer mailing list