[gnso-lockdomainname-dt] Call for volunteers for the Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group for the Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings
- To: "gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-lockdomainname-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-lockdomainname-dt] Call for volunteers for the Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group for the Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings
- From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 12:50:04 -0700
Please distribute to your members the call for volunteers for the Policy
Development Process (PDP) Working Group for the Locking of a Domain Name
Subject to UDRP Proceedings.
The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council seeks volunteers to
serve on a Working Group that will address the locking of a domain name subject
to Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) proceedings. After investigating
and considering specific issues (detailed below), the Working Group is expected
to make recommendations to the GNSO Council to address the issues identified
with the locking of a domain name subject to UDRP Proceedings.
What This Group Will Do
The PDP Working Group should, as a first step, request public input on this
issue in order to have a clear understanding of the exact nature and scope of
issues encountered with the locking of a domain name subject to UDRP
Proceedings. Based on this information, and its own views, and any additional
information gathering the Working Group deems necessary, the PDP Working Group
is expected to make recommendations to the GNSO Council to address the issues
identified with the locking of a domain name subject to UDRP Proceedings.
As part of the WG deliberations, it is suggested that the WG considers, amongst
other, the following:
* 1. Whether the creation of an outline of a proposed procedure, which a
complainant must follow in order for a registrar to place a domain name on
registrar lock, would be desirable.
* 2. Whether the creation of an outline of the steps of the process that a
registrar can reasonably expect to take place during a UDRP dispute would be
* 3. Whether the time frame by which a registrar must lock a domain after a
UDRP has been filed should be standardized.
* 4a. Whether what constitutes a "locked" domain name should be defined.
* 4b. Whether, once a domain name is 'locked' pursuant to a UDRP proceeding,
the registrant information for that domain name may be changed or modified.
* 5. Whether additional safeguards should be created for the protection of
registrants in cases where the domain name is locked subject to a UDRP
For further details, see the WG
How This Group Will Work
ICANN Working Groups use transparent, open processes. The meetings of this WG
will be recorded, and the recordings will be available to the public. The
mailing list for the Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings WG
will be archived publicly. Working Group members are expected to submit
Statements of Interest (SOI). The group will collaborate using a public
workspace. The Working Group is expected to follow the GNSO Working Group
How to Join
The Council invites interested parties to provide names of expected
participants who can then be added to the WG mailing list. The GNSO Council may
also invite stakeholders and experts to join. Community members who wish to be
invited to join the group should contact the GNSO
(gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxx>). This WG is
already forming; please apply promptly.
At its 15 December meeting, the GNSO Council initiated a
PDP<http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201112> on the requirement to lock a
domain name subject to UDRP proceedings.
A discussion on the requirements of locking a domain name subject to UDRP
proceedings was initially conducted as part of the Inter-Registrar Transfer
Part B PDP. As a result of that process, it was noted that "that locking a
domain name registration subject to a UDRP dispute should be a best practice"
however, the WG "noted that any changes to making this a requirement should be
considered in the context of any potential UDRP review." Subsequently, several
community members called out this issue in their comments on the state of the
published in October 2011, and as a result, the GNSO Council initiated a PDP
on this specific issue only. A sample of the community comments is below:
* "No requirement to lock names in period between filing complaint and
commencement of proceedings."
* "Need clarification of domain locking."
* "Unclear what is meant by "Status Quo."
* "No explanation of 'Legal Lock' mechanisms and when they go into effect or
when they should be removed."
Glen de Saint Géry