Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Your feedback requested - outstanding items from last week's call

["Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 1 Feb 2011, at 09:03, Marika Konings wrote:

> Dear All,
> 
> In order to facilitate discussion and input prior to our meeting, also for 
> those not being able to join today's call, please find below the main 
> outstanding items based on last week's meeting:


Thanks for this Marika. It's also helpful to try and discuss more of this on 
the various mailing lists rather than waiting for a meeting .. 


>       • Recommendation #1 - All unsponsored gTLD Registries shall offer the 
> Redemption Grace Period (RGP). For currently existing gTLDs that do not 
> currently offer the RGP, a transition period shall be allowed. All new gTLDs 
> must offer the RGP.
>> For discussion:  Should there be an exemption for TLDs that do not sell 
>> domains at all (what has been referred to in the VI WG as SRSU)?

I would say yes or no. It doesn't actually matter if they do or they don't, as 
they're all being registered and used by the same entity .. so it's probably 
just easier to give them the exemption .. 

Or am I missing something?


>       • Recommendation #2 - Define Registered Name Holder at Expiration” 
> (RNHaE) as the Registered Name Holder of record just prior to the Expiration 
> of the Registered Name.
>> Comments: The language needs to be precise regarding which registrant is 
>> being referred to. Presumably the one that is in WHOIS prior to Expiration. 
>> (Any suggestions for further improvement?)
>       • Recommendation #3 - Following expiration, during Autorenew Grace 
> Period, if a Registrar Deletes a Registered Name and that Registered Name 
> enters the RGP, the Registrar must allow the Registered Name Holder at 
> Expiration to redeem the Registered Name. This is regardless of any changes 
> made to Whois data or other records between expiration of the domain and 
> entering RGP.  This is excepted where the Registrant has explicitly agreed to 
> a reassignment of the domain, in a separate unilateral action at the time of 
> reassignment, name to another Registered Name Holder.
>> Comments: Michael Young to provide further information. The WG also 
>> discussed that the recommendation should specify what the authoritative 
>> source for the information on the Registered Name Holder at expiration 
>> should be e.g. as shown in WHOIS. (WG members encouraged to provide 
>> alternative language for consideration)  


If Michael could explain his reasoning it would be helpful. I *think* I know 
what he's trying to say, but the current wording opens up several nasty cans of 
worms

>       • Recommendation #6 - The price charged for post-expiration renewal 
> during the [guaranteed renewal period] must be explicitly stated in the 
> current registration agreement or on the Registrar's web site (if any). This 
> price must also be provided to the Registered Name Holder at expiration at 
> the time of registration and when pre-and post-expiration renewal notices are 
> provided.
>> There is no requirement that the price remains constant during the entire 
>> post-expiration period, but if it varies over time, that variation must be 
>> included in the above disclosures. The price may notvary based on any 
>> perceived or measured value beyond the “face” value of the Registered Name.
>> 
>> Comment: Some suggested that the recommendation should capture better that 
>> the focus is on disclosure and not limiting pricing. (WG members encouraged 
>> to provide alternative language for consideration)

I'm in favour of disclosure of pricing, but I wonder does it actually help 
anyone? In the Irish market, for example, there is only one ICANN accredited 
registrar (us). We are the only company selling domain names and other services 
that is bound by the RAA and consensus policies that ICANN (or anyone else) has 
any easy visibility of. While the other companies that offer domain names in 
the Irish market are obviously bound by the RAA via the registrar they choose 
to use there is no easy way for anyone to monitor their compliance with this 
sort of thing.
So I would wonder if this kind of thing means that effectively a compliant 
registrar is being made to disclose more information than a reseller .. or a 
reseller of a reseller of a reseller 

>       • Recommendation #10 - The registration agreement and registrar web 
> site (if one is used) must clearlyindicate what methods will be used to 
> deliver pre- and post-expiration notifications.
>> Comments: Some expressed concern that this recommendation could be 
>> interpreted in an overly narrow sense i.e. bind the registrar to the methods 
>> specified at the time of registration, but it was pointed out that the 
>> registrar could modify its methods at any time as long as the registrant 
>> would be notified of such changes. Wording to reflect this requested.

I have issues with this and I'm one of the people this refers to :)

We're talking about binding terms, contracts and agreements.

Under Irish and EU law it is problematic to change the terms of a contract 
while the contract is active (sorry - not a lawyer, so that's worded badly). 
Basically if I enter into a contract with someone on January 1st I cannot 
simply change the terms of the contract on January 3rd (or later). If a 
supplier / provider / $whatever changed the terms of a contract without getting 
the user to agree to the changes / accept them it can be problematic. I don't 
think it's illegal, but even if it weren't a potential legal issue it's 
definitely a customer service issue.
I would, therefore, be more inclined to use more open language, as it's not as 
simple as "changing" stuff later as some people seem to contend

Regards

Michele

> 
> Please feel free to share your comments, suggestions and/or proposed edits 
> with the mailing list.
> 
> 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

PS: Check out our latest offers on domains & hosting: http://domainoffers.me/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845