<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [bc-gnso] Outline for discussion of RAA comments today
- To: "Steve Delbianco" <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx, "bc - GNSO list" <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Outline for discussion of RAA comments today
- From: gabrielaszlak@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:45:59 +0000
Dear all,
Steve: thanks so much as always for the excellent work and the useful and
organized information you send to facilitate our analysis and interchange of
ideas.
My apologies to all: I will have to follow this issue through the transcripts
as something urgent has just came up and I cannot participate today.
Regards,
G.
Gabriela Szlak
eInstituto
Enviado desde mi BlackBerry de Movistar (http://www.movistar.com.ar)
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:26:16
To: 'bc - GNSO list'<bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [bc-gnso] Outline for discussion of RAA comments today
Here's an outline for today's member discussion of BC comments on the RAA.
(11am eastern US time)
Public Comment page is
here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/proposed-raa-22apr13-en.htm>.
The proposed final RAA is
here<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-22apr13-en.pdf>.
Initial comments due 13-May
Outline:
1. Privacy/Proxy Specification
(link<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-responsibilities-22apr13-en.pdf>)
There is no Service level specified for timing and methods to relay
communications and reveal data to complainant.
2. Whois
Maintain bulk access to Whois (port 43)
"Willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable whois information" as basis to
suspend a registration (3.7.7.2)
If Registrant data isn't validated in 15 days, should registrations be
suspended during manual validation?
Should same accuracy requirement apply to Account Holder data as well?
3. Enforcement of Registrant Rights
(link<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-responsibilities-22apr13-en.pdf>),
in particular:
"You shall not be subject to false advertising or deceptive practices by your
Registrar or though any proxy or privacy services made available by your
Registrar. This includes deceptive notices, hidden fees, and any practices that
are illegal under the consumer protection law of your residence."
Do we need additional clarity in order to enforce Registrar obligations?
Proposed RAA says:
RAA 3.7.10 Registrar shall publish on its website(s) and/or provide a link
to the Registrants’ Rights and Responsibilities Specification attached hereto
and shall not take any action inconsistent with the corresponding provisions of
this Agreement or applicable law.
Note: during the Beijing meeting, ICANN attorney Samantha Eisner told the BC
that Public comment would be particularly valuable in these areas:
Registrant rights & responsibilities. This was drafted by registrars.
Validation of registrant data (registrant and account holder?)
Penalties for inaccurate data
Registrars want to drop Port 43 access for thick registries
Unilateral amendment by ICANN.
--
Steve DelBianco
Executive Director
NetChoice
http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org
+1.202.420.7482
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|