[gnso-rap-dt] Further clarification regarding scope

[Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

As further clarification of section 1.5, pages 4-5 of the executive summary of 
the GNSO Issues Report on Registration Abuse Policies was requested in the last 
meeting, it might be worth pointing out that this section refers to chapter 7 
'Is this issue in scope of GNSO Policy Making'. The first part of this chapter 
outlines that registration abuse policies are in principle within ICANN's 
mission (see http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm#I), although it does 
highlight that as no specific issue has been identified it is unclear at this 
stage 'whether more uniformity might be necessary to facilitate the technical 
reliability, and/or operational stability of the Internet'. The report goes on 
to recommend that 'if in its next steps, the Council identifies specific policy 
issues or questions related to registration abuse that warrant further 
examination or policy development activity, the following questions related to 
scope should be reconsidered in the context of the specific issue(s) presented'.

The reference to section 4.2.3. of the RAA was included to highlight that 
if/when a specific policy issue(s) is/have been identified related to 
registration abuse, 'the establishment of new and revised consensus policies 
concerning the registration of domain names, including abuse in the 
registration of names' could be considered. In addition, it might be worth 
pointing out that section 4.1.2 of the RAA provides that registrars have to 
comply with new or revised policies if the topic is within the picket fence OR 
if the agreement "expressly provides for compliance" such as in subsections 
3.3.4, 3.3.8, 3.7.5, 3.7.8, and 3.7.9. Similar provisions can be found in 
registry agreements, e.g. relating to temporary security stability specs and 
central Whois. However, if the issue is deemed outside of the list of topics on 
which ICANN may impose new obligations via Consensus Policies and does not fall 
under any of these other provisions, it does not mean that other avenues such 
as recommendations for best practices cannot be explored, as long as the issue 
is within scope of ICANN's mission and GNSO policy-making.

As questions relating scope, picket fence and policy development options come 
up on a regular basis and not only in this WG, Margie has offered to provide an 
overview of these issues at the next RAP WG meeting or a separate meeting for 
those interested. Please let me know if you are interested.

With best regards,

Marika