ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

RE: [gnso-lockpdp-wg] Differentiating between lockings in case of own and third party privacyservices

  • To: "'Luc SEUFER'" <lseufer@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Volker Greimann <volker@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-lockpdp-wg] Differentiating between lockings in case of own and third party privacyservices
  • From: "Dorrain, Kristine" <kdorrain@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:07:50 +0000

My thoughts on this are that this puts the Provider in violation of the UDRP.  
We have to have the administrative review done in 3 calendar days from the date 
the complaint is filed.  If we are still still waiting for data from the 
Registrar after 3 business days, we will not be able to meet our 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx] 
On Behalf Of Luc SEUFER
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:56 AM
To: Volker Greimann; Gnso-lockpdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-lockpdp-wg] Differentiating between lockings in case of own 
and third party privacyservices

Hi Volker,

IMHO the system you are proposing is the current one where Registrar have a 
larger window to reply to the request for verification sent by the UDRP 

With the current straw man where the domain name is locked within one business 
day and the domain name locked immediately, proxy/privacy providers have next 
to no opportunity to lift their service.

Furthermore it seems logical to me that Proxy/Privacy services provider be 
given the chance to communicate the actual registrant details to the UDRP 
provider at the time of the request for verification. Rather than having the 
UDRP Provider undergo their administrative compliance review twice, and have 
the complainant amend their complaint at a later stage.

Keeping in mind the WG recommendations, we could opt for a 2 steps verification:

- within 1 business day from the first verification request Registrar would 
lock the domain against registrar transfer operations. Notify the registrant of 
the complaint and the subsequent lock activation and remind them that they may 
lift  any applicable proxy/privacy service within the next 2 business days. And 
simultaneously notify UDRP Provider of the lock.
- within 3 business days lock the domain name against any operation and provide 
the UDRP Provider with the definitive registrant details. Thus allowing the 
complaint to amend their complaint if need be.

What's your thoughts on that proposal?

All the best,


On 10 Jan 2013, at 17:13 , Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> To describe our current process:
> 1) We receive the inquiry email from the proider.
> 2) We review the domain name.
> 3a) In case the domain uses our privacy service, the service is deactivated, 
> then the domain is locked
> 3b) In all other cases, the domain is locked. If the domain name uses a known 
> privacy service, we inform the provider of this fact.
> 4) We respond to the inquiry email with the requested data points.
> I would like to propose that accredited whois privacy providers rather belong 
> in category 3a than 3b in oder to ensure the service can be removed in case 
> of it wanting to reveal the underlaying registrant. To achieve that, a 
> differentiated locking  procedure may be beneficial where a lock is in place 
> but modifications could still be made by the registrar within a limited 
> window:
> Such as:
> -> After receipt of the provider notification, the domain name is locked, 
> however, within a certain time period 2-3 working days after the lock, a 
> registrar may allow modifications if ICANN accredited whois privacy and/or 
> proxy providers provide updated information replacing the registrant record 
> to reflect the actual registrant.
> Volker



This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have 
received this e-mail by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and 
delete it from your system. You must not copy the message or disclose its 
contents to anyone.

Think of the environment: don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy