[gnso-lockpdp-wg] MP3 Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP proceedings teleconference - Thursday 31st January 2013 at 15:00 UTC

[Julia Charvolen <julia.charvolen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,


The next Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP proceedings teleconference is 
scheduled for Thursday, 07 February 2013 at 15:00 UTC.


Please find the MP3 recording of the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP 
proceedings teleconference held on Thursday 31st  January 2013 at 15:00 UTC

http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-locking-domain-name-20130131-en.mp3

On page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#jan

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master 
Calendar page:
http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/


Attendees:
Hago Dafalla – NCUC
Kristine Dorrain – NAF
Lisa Garono - IPC
Alan Greenberg - ALAC (Vice Chair)
Volker Greimann - RrSG
Celia Lerman - CBUC
David Maher - RySG
Joanne Teng (on behalf of David Roache-Turner) – WIPO
Luc Seufer – RrSG
Matt Schneller - IPC
Fisal Shah – IPC
Gabriela Szlak – CBUC

Apologies :
Laurie Anderson - RrSG
Michele Neylon - RrSG (Chair)

ICANN staff:
Marika Konings
Beery 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 for 31st January:
Marika Konings:Welcome to the UDRP Domain Name Lock WG meeting of 31 January 
2013
  Volker Greimann:Hello everyone.
  Volker Greimann:Am i too soon?
  Volker Greimann:early, i mean
  Alan Greenberg:Guest - Who are you??
  Gabriela Szlak:I am still not connected to the dial in
  Gabriela Szlak:I can´t get into
  Alan Greenberg:Perhaps "guest" is an advocate of Whois privacy and doesn't 
want his/her identity known.
  Gabriela Szlak::)
  Luc Seufer:No Irish guy telling us about his great adventures Today?
  Marika Konings:Hi Gabriela - the operator sees no one in the queue. Are you 
already speaking to the operator?
  Luc Seufer:ROFL
  Marika Konings:Alternatively, can we dial out to you?
  Volker Greimann:He is following his secret passion as an Elvis impersonator
  Hago Dafalla:hi all
  Volker Greimann:imagine tumbleweeds blowing past a desert surface
  Julia Charvolen:Joanne Teng is standing in for David Roache Turner for 
today's meeting
  Julia Charvolen:(WIPO)
  Matt Schneller:Maybe we move the "A registrar..." block of new text above 
"These changes..." and amend to "These changes should be prevented from this 
time through the remaining pendency..."
  Matt Schneller:actually, this is better: "These changes must be prevented 
from receipt of a request for verification through the remaining pendency..."
  Kristine Dorrain:+1
  Volker Greimann:there would have to be a deadline
  Matt Schneller:We could always provide suggestions to GNSO and note that they 
may prefer to wait to implement until the privacy PDP or etc...
  Kristine Dorrain:Volker, the "second deadline" would have the effect of just 
extending the lock period
  Kristine Dorrain:from the Provider's prospective, anyway
  Luc Seufer:not practical "from the Provider's prospective" ;-)
  Matt Schneller:Hey Volker, administratively, how to you propose making sure 
that the p/p service only reveals registrant information as it was at the time 
the verification request was issued, to make sure that the p/p service doesn't 
inform their client that a UDRP was filed and that they have48 hours to put in 
new (or inaccurate) information)?
  Luc Seufer:until thep/p accreditation won't have been setup I suppose we will 
have to rely on good faith
  Volker Greimann:Matt, I am assuming that that privilege would only be 
extended to accredited services or registrar-affliated services
  Volker Greimann:in that case, the obligation of whom to reveal would be part 
of the accreditation obligations
  Kristine Dorrain:Matt and Luc, that is the current process...we just trust 
the Registrar...
  Luc Seufer:who in turns trust the p/p provider
  Kristine Dorrain:I think it's important to recognize that we cannot 
proactively prevent all gaming/bad actors.
  Kristine Dorrain:We're trying to create a process for the Registrars that are 
trying to be good actors but just don't know how.  The bad actors will continue 
to use shady antics
  Matt Schneller:whoops, just hung up instead of re-muting.  gotta call back 
in, sorry
  Luc Seufer:2 business days registrar wise?
  Matt Schneller:I think the neutral, generally applicable standard - 2 
business days or whatever - is preferable
  Volker Greimann:I think the main danger is in cases wherethe complaint is 
directed at multiple domain names using one privacy provider as there may be 
multiple respondents.
  Volker Greimann:I agree with that idea
  Luc Seufer:+1
  Volker Greimann:agreed
  Volker Greimann:but that distinction is not clear to all users of the terms
  Matt Schneller:do you think the 2 business days is enough?
  Matt Schneller:I still think we'd get more compliance from having it the 
rule, even if it's not currently enforceable since the p/p service isn't 
currently an accredited party