|
ATTENDEES:
Registrar - Bruce Tonkin
Registrar -Ross Rader
Registrar - Brian Cute
Registry - Jeff Neuman
ICANN Chief
Registrar Liaison - Dan Halloran
Deletes Task Force Chair - Jordyn Buchanan
Deletes Task Force User Rep - John Berryhill
Bruce Tonkin referred to the The Deletes
Implementation report v2 http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/DeletesImplementationReportv2.0.html
3.1.1 regarding when domain names should be deleted with extenuating circumstances
said there were two extremes,
- the extenuating circumstances should all be listed
- the case could be put up to ICANN and documented.
In the current draft, (noted above) an in-between solution was proposed defining
extenuating circumstances. Renewal under extenuating circumstances must be
recorded for ICANN to inspect.
It was further suggested that ICANN keep a track of the number of complaints
and that if a registrar exceeds a certain number, there should be an inquiry.
Brian Cute proposed the following additions :
- payment dispute or a discrepancy in the amount paid
- billing disputes (by character different)
Brian undertook to supply
further wording
to the deletes implementation committee
mailing list.
Jeff Neuman
requested the addition of “valid” to court action.
Bruce Tonkin
inquired about keeping records
and suggested that they should be consistent with what is in the contract
and left to ICANN Staff rather than being the subject of a policy.
John Berryhill suggested limiting the discretion
of the Registrar with regard to litigation (citing the example where
some countries have a large backlog of litigation cases that could
go on for years potentially used as a mechanism for
a registrant to retain a name for no charge) as a protection
measure and proposed that ICANN should decide on any extenuating circumstances
in addition to a defined list (to ensure that this rule wasn’t abused).
Dan Halloran said that ICANN would probably have an exhaustive list
of reasonable extenuating circumstances, so the probability of having to rule
would not be likely, and would therefore be a manageable task.
Bruce Tonkin commented on 3.1.2., a text clarified by Bret Fausett:
In the absence of extenuating circumstances, a domain name must be deleted
within 45 days of either the registrar or the registrant terminating a registration
agreement.
Discussion showed satisfaction with the text
Comments on 3.2.1. the
issue being what to do in the case of a UDRP dispute and the registrant does
not want to renew the name in a UDRP dispute.
Bruce Tonkin reminded that there were costs attached to a manual process
while normal renewals was typically
an automatic process
It was agreed on that the Redemption Grace Period was one of the methods of
continuing the domain name.
Bruce Tonkin offered to produce another draft document following the
discussion and the e-mail input.
If no further comments were received, the report would be finalized and passed
on to the task force for assimilation into the Final Task Force report be
sent to the GNSO Council.
If members of the Deletes Implementation committee thought that it was necessary
another teleconference could be arranged.
Bruce Tonkin thanked all the participants for their attendance
and comments that had been sent to the list.
Teleconference ended at 0:55 UTC, 8:55 Melbourne time
Next teleconference:
To be decided, if necessary
see: http://www.dnso.org/meetings.html
Dial in details will be sent individually to all the members.
|
Information from: |
© GNSO Names Council |