Re: [gnso-raa-dt] Expected staff inputs to RAA Working Group

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Doug,

Thank you for this advisory.  I look forward to a better understanding of those 
contractual provisions that are deemed to be "hard to enforce".  

For several years now, registrants have been complaining (both anecdotally and 
in writing to the Compliance Department) that a major registrar has been 
violating the terms of the Consensus Policy on Transfers (even after the Staff 
publication of the 3 April '08 Registrar Advisory Concerning the 
Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy) by refusing to allow transfers subsequent to a 
WHOIS update.

So let me ask:  When we have a clear consensus policy supplemented by a clear 
advisory and yet we see that a problem is *still* ongoing, what exactly are we 
to fault and/or how should the situation best be addressed?  

(1)  Is there some lack of clarity in the consensus policy and/or advisory 
language?
(2)  Are there no provisions by way of which ICANN can take action?
(3)  Is the Compliance Department simply unwilling to take action against a 
major player?

Just today, another such complaint emerged -- please see 
http://www.nullamatix.com/godaddy-nightmare-express-written-objection-to-transfe/

If we are to assist in facilitating ICANN's contractual compliance initiatives 
it would be helpful to understand (using this particular example) the nature of 
the roadblocks that the compliance team is running into.

Looking forward to any clarifications that may be offered,

Danny Younger