Thanks Andrew -
The limitation that indemnification should not cover open, existing claims by ICANN against third parties makes sense to me.
On a related note, given the enforcement language we have in place in the draft, the IETF Trust could agree that ICANN is the appropriate party to continue with enforcement of those items (subject to the cooperation clauses, etc.) so that responsibility for those existing enforcement actions doesn¹t get called into question.
Sam ‹ Samantha Eisner Deputy General Counsel, ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, California 90094 USA Direct Dial: +1 310 578 8631
On 8/17/16, 11:15 AM, "iana-ipr-bounces@nro.net on behalf of Andrew Sullivan" <iana-ipr-bounces@nro.net on behalf of ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 01:56:11PM -0400, Alissa Cooper wrote:
- Outstanding items in the assignment agreement
- Indemnification duration (6.1)
I'd like to add to this, as well, the nature of indemnification. The Trustees have a small worry here.
It turns out that ICANN has some claims against third parties in respect of the IANA trademark and some domain names, and as we've heard there is some legal activity there.
The indemnification only covers claims by third parties, and not open claims by ICANN against third parties.
We may need to make a small adjustment here.
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
Iana-ipr mailing list Iana-ipr@nro.net https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/iana-ipr