Re: [ga] Re: Request for a Working Group
ICANN has by now signed a variety of contracts, drafted without
community input or consensus support, under which it has come to regulate
a bunch of different aspects of registry and registrar conduct. Many of
us think that ICANN is using these contracts to control matters that are
*not* "squarely within its purview." We can argue about whether any
particular piece of regulation is within ICANN's mission, properly
understood, but that argument has to turn on the nature of the regulation
in question. The mere fact that regulation has been incorporated in a
contract doesn't answer the question whether it is within ICANN's mission
-- and the ideal of consensus shouldn't bar people from questioning
contract provisions that didn't result from consensus processes. (I'll
grant you that the process leading to the registrar contract looks a lot
better, from a consensus standpoint, when you compare it to the egregious
registry contract negotiation process . . . )
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:
> Whether you like it or not, we currently regulate the registrar community by
> way of contracts (such as the Registrar Accreditation Agreement). These
> contracts specify registrar obligations, and how they are to attend to
> "Business Dealings, Including with Registered Name Holders" (section 3.7).
> This puts the issue of registrar practices squarely within ICANN's purview,
> and creating modifications to this contract language indeed falls within the
> ICANN consensus process.
> Clearly we have a right to establish provisions to curtail nefarious business
> practices in order to "enhance user choice and satisfaction".
> This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
> Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html