[gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08] RE: Issue III

["Trachtenberg, Marc H." <MTrachtenberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think first we need to define "partial-bulk transfer."  In other words, do we 
mean only registrar-initiated transfers?  How many domain names are the minimum 
for a "partial-bulk transfer"?  Are these transfers that are not treated as 
renewals?


Marc H. Trachtenberg

Winston & Strawn LLP
35 West Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60601-9703
T: +1 (312) 558-7964
F: +1 (312) 558-5700
C: +1 (773) 677-3305

bio<http://www.winston.com/index.cfm?contentID=24&itemID=15281> | 
vcard<http://www.winston.com/sitefiles/wsvcard/15281.vcf> | 
email<mailto:MTrachtenberg@xxxxxxxxxxx> | 
www.winston.com<http://www.winston.com/>


[cid:829544916@26082008-29A3]







________________________________
From: owner-gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 11:07 AM
To: Gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08] Issue III


Since we are in an information gathering phase of our work, we should leave the 
use cases open for public comment. If we decide to recommend partial bulk 
transfers, we could do so without the restrictions imposed by the NueLevel 
Registry Service (...by means of a stock or asset purchase, merger or similar 
transaction...). This would permit registrars to make their own business 
decisions about whether to offer partial bulk transfers to their customers 
(registrants). However, voluntary bulk transfers may not be the answer for 
registrants because it requires the cooperation of the losing and gaining 
registrar and I do not anticipate that losing registrars will be easily 
motivated to participate. In the information gathering phase, can we open for 
discussion, partial bulk transfers that do not require losing registrar 
cooperation? This would be a great help for owners of domain portfolios 
(registrants) especially those who frequently acquire domains by purchasing 
portfolios or business acquisition.

Completely separate from the bulk transfers issue, the collective primary 
purpose of all of the inter-registrar PDPs is to make registrar transfers 
easier and more dependable for registrants without sacrificing security. There 
are many complaints by registrants that some registrars make it tedious and 
difficult to transfer out. It may be outside the scope of this workgroup, but 
another work group (C) will soon deal with unlocking domains. This issue should 
be expanded to easily obtained authorization codes because unlocking domains 
and providing auth codes are two required tasks for inter-registrar transfers 
that losing registrars can use to make transfers extremely tedious.

Best regards,
Michael Collins
Internet Commerce Association<http://www.internetcommerce.org/>
+1. 202 657 4570


The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. Therefore, if 
this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. 
Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. 
Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author.
******************************************************************************
Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and cannot 
be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.