ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-pednr-dt]


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

RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] Exceptions

  • To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] Exceptions
  • From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 09:25:45 -0500


It dawns on me that perhaps we are using the wrong term. How about "variants" instead of exceptions?

If we can find a way to build more flexibility into the policy, that would be fine but I wonder whether it is actually possible.

Alan

At 05/12/2010 04:29 PM, James M. Bladel wrote:

My general thoughts about "Policy Exceptions"

If we are creating exceptions to policy, then we are tacitly
acknowledging that registrars require discretion in this area.  Which
raises the question of whether Consensus Policy is the appropriate
hammer for this particular nail.

So, we should look at other remedies (e.g. Best Practices) or build more
flexibility into the policy language itself.


Thanks--

J.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Exceptions
From: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, December 05, 2010 3:10 pm
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: PEDNR <gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>


Ok. So that pretty much confirms what I suspected


Mr. Michele Neylon
Blacknight
http://Blacknight.tel

Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity

On 5 Dec 2010, at 15:49, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>
>
>
> On 05/12/10 15:43, "Pam Little" <Pam.Little@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Neither Stacy Burnette nor me have come across any request in the past.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pam
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:owner-gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michele Neylon ::
>> Blacknight
>> Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 7:40 AM
>> To: Marika Konings
>> Cc: PEDNR
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Exceptions
>>
>>
>> Marika
>>
>> To your knowledge has any registrar _ever_ used this?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Michele
>>
>>
>> On 5 Dec 2010, at 15:30, Marika Konings wrote:
>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> In response to the question on exceptions, it was suggested that the WG
>>> might want to take a look at the ICANN Procedure For Handling WHOIS
>>> Conflicts with Privacy Law, at
>>> http://icann.org/en/processes/icann-procedure-17jan08.htm, that outlines
>>> a procedure to be used for requesting waiver from full compliance with
>>> Whois requirements based on privacy laws. While an exceptions procedure
>>> as envisioned in the PEDNR might not need to be as detailed or complex,
>>> it might serve as a starting point.
>>>
>>> With best regards,
>>>
>>> Marika
>>
>> Mr Michele Neylon
>> Blacknight Solutions
>> Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
>> ICANN Accredited Registrar
>> http://www.blacknight.com/
>> http://blog.blacknight.com/
>> http://blacknight.mobi/
>> http://mneylon.tel
>> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
>> US: 213-233-1612
>> UK: 0844 484 9361
>> Locall: 1850 929 929
>> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
>> -------------------------------
>> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business
>> Park,Sleaty
>> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
>>
>>
>
>





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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy