[gnso-irtp-b-jun09] Impact of "Voluntarily" language on 60 day lock following registrant change
- To: "Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx List" <Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] Impact of "Voluntarily" language on 60 day lock following registrant change
- From: George Kirikos <icann@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 10:22:21 -0400
In November 2009, David Giza of ICANN provided an interpretation of
the GoDaddy 60-day lock after a registrant change which has been
suggested to be "opt-in". This was posted to the IRTP-B working group
at the bottom at:
recently, and led to some discussions. I believe this interpretation
needs to be looked at again, as it did not appear to fully consider
the meaning of "voluntarily" in the language of the transfers policy.
See below for points pulled from that prior thread (with a few
editorial changes and cleanup):
I believe another route to attack ICANN's current interpretation is
via the word "voluntarily" in the transfer policy, i.e. it says:
"Express written objection to the transfer from the Transfer Contact.
(e.g. - email, fax, paper document or other processes by which the
Transfer Contact has expressly and ****voluntarily***** objected
through opt-in means)"
(emphasis added for "voluntarily")
There are various definitions of "voluntarily" or "voluntary", but I
think the most apt one is #7 at:
"acting or done of one's own free will ***without valuable
consideration or legal obligation***"
*** = emphasis added
I believe that conflicts with GoDaddy and ICANN's interpretation,
because one simply *cannot* opt-in via a *binding legal contract* to
something that is *voluntary*. I ask that ICANN's compliance take
another look at this. If something is truly voluntary, the "express
written objection" can be revoked at *any time* and is thus not
permanent or binding in any way legally.
I think this point warrants further examination by ICANN and this
workgroup, to clarify exactly what can or cannot be "opted-in" to,
i.e. what is a minimum standard, what are a registrant's inalienable
One can see further discussion on these latter points in the posts at:
in the "60 day lock following registrant change" thread, in particular:
Can, for example, a registrant "opt-in" to a binding and irreversible
360 day lock or a 50-year lock that *cannot be undone* at a later
date? If so, how would that be "voluntary"?