ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[gnso-lockpdp-wg] MP3 Locking of a Domain Name subject to URDP proceedings - Thursday 13 December at 15:00 UTC

  • To: "gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-lockpdp-wg] MP3 Locking of a Domain Name subject to URDP proceedings - Thursday 13 December at 15:00 UTC
  • From: Julia Charvolen <julia.charvolen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:04:01 -0800

Dear all,

The next Locking of a Domain Name subject to URDP Proceedings teleconference is 
scheduled  EXCEPTIONALLY  on Wednesday 19 December at 1400 UTC  .

Please find the MP3 recording of the Locking of a Domain Name subject to URDP 
Proceedings teleconference held on  Thursday 13 December 2012  at 15:00 UTC at:


On page: 

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master 
Calendar page:



Laurie Anderson – RrSG

Hago Dafalla - NCSG

Kristine Dorrain - NAF

Lisa Garono - IPC

Alan Greenberg - ALAC (Vice-Chair)

Volker Greimann – RrSG

David Roache-Turner - WIPO

Juan Manuel Rojas – ALAC

Matt Schneller - IPC

Gabriela Szlak – CBUC

Melody Agee and Michelle Coon (representing David Maher) - RySG


Celia Lerman – CBUC

David Maher – RySG

Michele Neylon – RrSG


Marika Konings

Berry Cobb

Julia Charvolen

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

Thank you.

Kind regards,

Julia Charvolen

For GNSO Secretariat

 Adobe Connect Chat transcript:

  Marika Konings 2:Welcome to the UDRP Domain Name Lock WG Meeting of 13 
December 2012
  Matt Schneller:morning all
  Juan Manuel Rojas:morning all
  Hago Dafalla:hi all
  Gabriela Szlak:good morning (afternoon here :)
  Hago Dafalla:good evening all
  Gabriela Szlak:or noon
  Juan Manuel Rojas:good morning/afternoon/evening all :)
  Laurie Anderson:Morning everyone
  Julia Charvolen:Lisa Garono joined the bridge
  Matt Schneller:Hi Kristine, is there a document that NAF issues if the 
complaint isn't fixed in 5 days?  Maybe we could refer to the document that's 
issued by name
  Marika Konings:David Roche-Turner has joined the call
  Matt Schneller:(and maybe David could identify what WIPO calls their 
equivalent document)
  David Roache-Turner:At WIPO, we call it a complaint defeciency notice
  Matt Schneller:David, if the complainant doesn't fix after receipt of the 
deficiency notice, what issues then - notice of withdrawal?
  David Roache-Turner:we also need to make provision for the complaint being 
withdrawn for any other reason (for example, because the matter settles, and 
the complainant requests withdrawal of its complaint on that basis)
  Kristine Dorrain:Matt, our document is called "Dismissal Order"...which is 
generic for any type of Dismissal at NAF (for any reason--compliance, 
settlement, etc)
  Kristine Dorrain:We call the deficiency notice the same thing:  something 
like "Notice of Deficiencies."
  Matt Schneller:covered it!
  Matt Schneller:Does this work "within one business day (for registrar) after 
transmission of notice of withdrawal..."?
  Laurie Anderson:We go by the time stamp on the notice.
  Laurie Anderson:From a process standpoint, we notify domains by proxy upon 
receipt of the verification request.
  Laurie Anderson:in their agreement with their customer, DBP will cancel 
privacy and we verify the registrant to the arb. provider.
  Juan Manuel Rojas:Sorry, My call was down.
  Matt Schneller:Good point - draft rec #3 seems to be the best place.  Agree; 
I think having it there provides the groundwork for future enforcement
  Kristine Dorrain:and, it allows registrars trying to act in good faith to do 
  Matt Schneller:The p/p service is listed as registrant, and so may need to 
comply in order to satisfy their contractual obligations to registrars
  Matt Schneller:It's a contractual matter between the registrant and p/p 
service, isn't it?  If the p/p service's contract says they will change Whois, 
no reason why we should override that
  Laurie Anderson:agreed Matt.
  Volker Greimann:Remember that for any registrar-affiliated privacy service of 
a registrar also affiliated with a registry, three contrary UDRP decision may 
mean exclusion from the new gTLD progra
  Volker Greimann:m
  Volker Greimann:regardless of whether there are an underlying registrant
  Volker Greimann:if it says [Privacy Provider] in the decision, that is the 
losing respondent
  David Roache-Turner:re DR # 9 should be upon receipt of a panel decision from 
the provider, per the Rules
  Kristine Dorrain:yes
  David Roache-Turner:As a prelude to receomndation to DR #7, would we also 
need to identify the basis of such requirement on the registrant to so notify 
the provider in the event of contact info chnages
  Kristine Dorrain:Agrreed
  Hago Dafalla:Agree
  Marika Konings:Please note that the next WG meeting will be scheduled for 
Wednesday 19 December at 14.00 UTC following the results of the doodle poll.
  Hago Dafalla:oky
  Volker Greimann:2 days before the end of the world? You are very hopeful, 
Marika ;-)
  Marika Konings::-)
  Matt Schneller:Should we just note that changes to contact information under 
UDRP Rule 2(e) instead of addressing the accuracy policy?
  Matt Schneller:Should we just note that changes to contact information under 
UDRP Rule 2(e) are permitted instead of addressing the accuracy policy?
  Matt Schneller:(fixed typo)
  Volker Greimann:indeed
  David Roache-Turner:thanks alan thanks all
  Matt Schneller:adios
  Alan Greenberg:ANd thanks to Marika and to Kristine for leading us through 
these points.

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy