[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [registrars] Xfer of SLD sponsorship/ EU Investigation/ Minutes of Teleconference
michael & all...
i believe that there has to be some sort of documentation requirement but
notarized statments are not practical in many countries and most definitely
not a "global business practices".
documentation has to be considered in light of both economics as well as
"universally accepted global business practice".
some sort of a redundant "internet-based" answerback e-mail confirmation
would seem to be more appropriate to me
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael D. Palage <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 1:23 PM
Subject: [registrars] Xfer of SLD sponsorship/ EU Investigation/ Minutes of
>There is a concern about the unauthorized transfer of domain name. It
>appears that NSI is claiming that it must safeguard against unauthorized
>slamming. Simple solution at least as I see it:
>(1) Establish guidelines similar to what NSI currently employs with regard
>to name changes or domain xfers,i..e a signed notarized statement.
>(2) NSI should make the change without investigation based upon Registrars'
>(3) Registrar is required to keep documentation of sponsorship transfer
>(4) If a registrar transferred name in bad faith, i.e. no proper
>documentation, registrar should pay a penalty or face de-accreditation in
>light of numerous bad faith transfers.
>This way registrars that act in good faith are not penalized and those that
>don't pay the price. The only question is who collects the penalty? Some
>component should go to the registry to cover their administrative costs,
>however, the majority of the penalty should go somewhere else. Where I do
>I also encourage public comment to the list with regard to the EU's (DGIV)
>investigation of NSI under Article 82 EC and Article 54 of the EEA
>The minutes from today DOC / ICANN teleconference will be able shortly.
>I welcome your responses.