DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [nc-transfer] FW: Briefing on Legal Conditions for PolicyImplementation


With all due respect, the Transfers TF does prescribe to the Registrars and
Registries "what" they must do.  

A few examples are that Registrars:

1)  must use a standard FOA before initiating a transfer
2)  must give out an Auth-code within 72 hours of request
3)  may not deny a transfer for:
	i)	Nonpayment for a pending or future registration period
	ii)	No response from the Registrant or Administrative contact
unless the Losing Registrar shows evidence of Express 		Objection
from the Registrant or Administrative Contact as described in section 3.e.vi
	iii)	Domain name in Registrar Lock Status
	iv)	Domain name registration period time constraints other than
during the first 60 days of initial registration.
	v)	General payment defaults between registrar and business
partners / affiliates in cases where the registrant for 		the
domain in question has paid for the registration.
4)  must submit to alternate dispute resolution

In addition, Registries must have a dispute mechanism (even if they are
compensated for it)

Now, all of these things may be good things and they all may be accepted by
the Registry and Registrar communities, I just don't have enough feedback on
these yet.  However, whether they are implemented through the Registrar
Accreditation Agreement or whether they are implemented through the
Registry-Registrar Agreements does not change the fact that there are new
affirmative obligations on the Registrars and Registries.

Again, let me stress that I am not offering a value judgment on whether
these things are good or bad, but just an observation that we do prescribe
the "what" as well as the "how."


-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Steinberg [mailto:synthesis@videotron.ca]
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 2:31 PM
To: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
Cc: Transfer TF (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [nc-transfer] FW: Briefing on Legal Conditions for

I have read the attached document, and at first glance see no where that we
need to make any changes. It may be more relevant to the whois task force
given the particular nature of that requirement but I dont feel at all
qualified to make any statements
on that issue.

With respect to Transfers, the way I see it, we are making recommendations
on *what* to change...the 'how to implement' is something we skated on a few
times and always specifically backed away from as far as I can remember.
If we map Louis' requirements in the document to the changes in Appendix A,
I can't find anything that needs changing on the *what* front. What he
appears to be discussing...is the *how* and the *can we?*  He has not come
out and said "I dont think we
should implement para x.xx.y.a (1)" so I have to assume there is nothing
glaringly impossible or illegal that struck him in his role as General

So we are down from specifics that need be addressed...to generalities and
possibilities and implementation issues.  Were we to change things...we
would be changing recommendations.  I believe our task was to take input and
formulate recommendations on
changes...not to tell ICANN how to implement them.

If our recommendations are accepted, I am sure they will find the right way
to implement them as Louis Touton puts it..."to proceed in a manner that
addresses the reasoned objections and concerns of these entities."  And if
there are things we recommended
that they cannot implement...so be it. At least we tried and came up with
what we thought was best after considering every possible angle and (most
important) taking input from wherever we could find it.


"Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" wrote:

> As I had indicated I would, I asked Louie to consult with us on the issues
related to the contracts for implementation of a policy recommendation by
registrars and/or registries.  He prepared the attached and forwarded to the
Names Council last night.
> Please review before our calls.
> We need to assess our recommendations against this legal clarification,
and determine if there is additional work needed.
> I think it will be helpful, after we digest this, to be able to also
consult with Louis Touton, General Counsel.
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                               Name:
>    general-counsel-briefing-20oct02.doc       Type: WINWORD File
>                                           Encoding: base64
>                                        Description:

Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin  phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec  fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>