[bestbits] US Support for Multistakeholder Governance is Conditional on US Remaining in Control

[Padmini]

Adding to that, he also said that the issue of jurisdiction doesn't relate
to the physical presence of ICANN  as much as the jurisdiction of dispute
resolution mechanisms, and to not focus on the former which is not as
relevant.
Basically, no move in jurisdiction will ever be supported.
On 20 Oct 2015 16:43, "Pranesh Prakash" <pranesh at cis-india.org> wrote:

> At a meeting with civil society actors, Larry Strickling of the US NTIA
> was asked by my colleague Padmini whether the US Congress would support the
> multistakeholder model if ICANN's jurisdiction were to shift.
>
> He said that it wouldn't.
>
> https://twitter.com/pranesh/status/656422297876561921
>
> --
> Pranesh Prakash
> Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
> http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283
> sip:pranesh at ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh at cis-india.org
> https://twitter.com/pranesh
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20151020/53e931b0/attachment.htm>