[gnso-irtp-b-jun09] whether/how best to clarify denial reason #7

["Diaz, Paul" <pdiaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello, all

I want to make sure that there's no misunderstanding about the position
I took on today's call.  Network Solutions is not opposed to the WG
digging into the topic of debate ("Whether, and if so, how best to
clarify denial reason #7").  If the consensus is that there's a problem
(i.e. ambiguity) with the current provisions, then this WG has the
mandate to develop clarifications.  Network Solutions will actively
participate in such process - even though we're comfortable with the
existing text.

My point remains, however, that policy work needs to be grounded in
fact.  Network Solutions fully supports the Registrar Stakeholder
Group's public position (as noted in its comments on the PPSC PDP
Initial Report) that "PDPs should be based on responsibly documented
evidence of an issue to be addressed.  Anecdotal evidence is
insufficient."  With that said, I apologize if it sounded like I was
dismissing some participants' concerns and/or the existence of problems.

To assist in the documentation of unacceptable use of locks that impede
transfer requests, let me offer the following example.  ICANN recently
called out one of our resellers for trying to assess a special fee
before unlocking the name and providing the AuthInfo code.  The reseller
claimed that the fee was to off-set "research costs" to ascertain the
registrant's bona fides (in fact, there were genuine problems with the
WHOIS records provided by the previous domain services provider),
thereby effectively holding back the name.  The registrant complained to
ICANN, and the Registrar Liaison staff (not Compliance, interestingly)
stepped in.  As Network Solutions had already disabused the reseller of
their tactic, they agreed to rescind the fee/unlock the domain, which
was subsequently transferred out.  

I hope we can cite other cases, and encourage members of the WG to
provide more examples.  Could these headaches have been avoided had the
IRTP been clearer?  I'm not sure, but that's what this WG is chartered
to sort out.  

Regards,

Paul Diaz
Network Solutions, LLC