<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[gnso-frn-dt] Responses from staff
- To: "gnso-frn-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-frn-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-frn-dt] Responses from staff
- From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 08:10:28 -0800
Dear All,
Please find below the feedback from staff in relation to the questions posed by
the drafting team. Let me know if you have any questions / comments, or we can
discuss in further detail during our next meeting.
With best regards,
Marika
============================
Question: What measures, if any, are in place as part of the current registrar
accreditation policy to prevent known offenders of sending fake renewal notices
to become an ICANN accredited registrar?
Response: ICANN has recently modified the accreditation application process to
ask for and check into more information about the background of applicants. The
application and supporting documents submitted by the applicant have to show
that it is eligible for accreditation as per Section II.A of the Statement of
Registrar Accreditation Policy
(http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/policy_statement.html#IIA), which means
that ICANN would reject an application if the applicant cannot prove that it is
eligible or if ICANN has any evidence that it isn't eligible.
Furthermore ICANN would also reject an application if the applicant and/or any
of its officers, directors, manager or any person or entity owning (or
beneficially owning) at least 5% percent of the applicant is concerned by any
reason for ineligibility as per Section II.B of the Statement of Registrar
Accreditation Policy. One of these reasons is: "within the past ten years, has
been convicted of a felony or of a misdemeanor related to financial activities,
or has been judged by a court to have committed fraud or breach of fiduciary
duty, or has been the subject of a judicial determination that ICANN deemed as
the substantive equivalent of any of these".
Question: As at first sight the issue of fake renewal notices seems to be
mainly linked to resellers, is there anything in the new RAA (2009 RAA) that
would provide more or better protections to address theissue of fake renewal
notices if these are sent by resellers?
Response: the 2009 RAA modifications did not directly address fake renewal
notices. Staff could check back to the 2009 suggested amendment topics to see
if anyone even raised this issue back then. However, registrars are fully
responsible for complying with every provision of the RAA, and the transfer
policy, and applicable laws, for every registration / renewal / transfer that
they make, whether they customer deals with the registrar directly or through
an intermediary/agent/reseller.
If any registration / renewal / transfer is processed in violation of the
agreement / policy (or applicable laws), thenICANN should be able to hold the
registrar fully accountable. That allegedly fake renewal notices are supposedly
linked mainly to resellers does not provide any safe harbor for any
registration / renewal / transfer processed by any registrar. It should be
taken into account that a reseller cannot process aregistration, renewal or
transfer except for through an accredited registrar.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|