Re: [gnso-frn-dt] Responses from staff

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

neato!

thanks Marika.

mikey


On Jan 26, 2012, at 10:10 AM, Marika Konings wrote:

> 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. 

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)