RE: [gnso-rap-dt] For your review - Nairobi presentation

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Clarification is needed.  When did the General Counsel say that?  What did
he say about the contractual language in every Registry Agreement (except
com/net) that empowers registries to take action against any form of abuse?
Yes the UDRP is one obvious example of a specific policy, but there can and
most likely will be others.  Doubts do not exist for many of us, so that
statement also needs clarification.  

 

Poor assumption that every Councilor will read a 100+ page report.

 

Mike Rodenbaugh

RODENBAUGH LAW

tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

 <http://rodenbaugh.com/> http://rodenbaugh.com

 

From: Greg Aaron [mailto:gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 12:44 PM
To: icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-rap-dt] For your review - Nairobi presentation

 

Dear Mike:

 

Slide 5 reflected what the ICANN General Counsel said.  If clarification is
needed, the slide could say: "ICANN General Counsel states: "Policies
involving the use of a domain name (unrelated to its registration) are
outside the scope of policies that ICANN could enforce on registries and/or
registrars."

 

Your argument seems to be that UDRP is a precedent or example of how ICANN
has power to regulate any or all domain name use.  Is that correct? 

 

Regarding your other point: I think you are referring to slide 6, which says
at the bottom: "Doubts about whether ICANN has the power to force contracted
parties to suspend domain names for malicious uses."  A statement of fact -
doubts exist, as per the initial report and the discussions over the months.
My assumption is that the Council members will read the report, which
contains the richer background, attributions, etc.

 

All best,

--Greg

 

 

 

 

 

  _____  

From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:29 PM
To: gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-rap-dt] For your review - Nairobi presentation

 

I have strong disagreement with the last sentence in 3d bullet of slide 5 -
ignores contract language and UDRP, should be deleted:  

.       Use issues concern what a registrant does with the domain after it
has been created, or the services the registrant operates on the domain.
These are largely out of scope for policy-making.

 

Similar disagreement with last bullet of slide 7, should say "Some
contracting parties have doubts."

 

Otherwise looks good, thanks.

 

Mike Rodenbaugh

RODENBAUGH LAW

tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> 

 

From: owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 2:22 AM
To: gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-rap-dt] For your review - Nairobi presentation

 

Dear All,

Please find attached for your review the proposed presentation for the
Registration Abuse Policies Information Session at the ICANN meeting in
Nairobi.

The meeting will take place on Wednesday 10 March from 16.00 - 17.30 local
time (13.00 - 14.30 UTC) in room Tsavo A. For further details, see
http://nbo.icann.org/node/8878. 

Please provide your comments / edits to the mailing list by Tuesday 2 March
at the latest.

Thanks,

Marika