[discuss] Some more legal tangles for ICANN

Fri Jun 27 10:42:20 UTC 2014

Snipped a lot for brevity

Parminder:

ICANN has no jurisdiction over .IR, hence all the rest of the point you are making, irrespective of its merits otherwise, is irrelevant in this case.

On 27 Jun 2014, at 12:38, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> The basic issue is that the US courts, at all levels, from the lowest onwards, have full jurisdiction over ICANN - its activities, assets, relationships, finances and so on. This is of course quite evident without having to go through the papers of this case, or a f

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140627/43acabb7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140627/43acabb7/signature.asc>