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

[martinsutton@xxxxxxxx]

Marika,

Thank you, very useful - I would favour the removal of both sentences and 
encourage debate in the wider community, rather than steer readers to a 
narrow view of scope.

Kind regards,

Martin

Martin C SUTTON 
Group Risk 
Manager, Group Fraud Risk and Intelligence | HSBC HOLDINGS PLC HGHQ
Group Security & Fraud Risk
8 Canada Square,Canary Wharf,London,E14 5HQ,United Kingdom
________________________________________________________________

Phone.     +44 (0)20 7991 8074 / 7991 8074
Mobile.     +44 (0) 7774556680
Email.       martinsutton@xxxxxxxx
________________________________________________________________



Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: owner-gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Mar 01 2010 15:18

Mail Size: 1094318


To
"gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
cc

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

  Entity
   HSBC Holdings plc - GMO



Dear All,

In light of the recent exchange of emails in relation to chapter 7 of the 
Issues Report 'Is this issue in scope of GNSO Policy Making', please note 
that the sentence 'Consideration of new policies related to the use of a 
domain name unrelated to its registration would not be within scope' on 
page 42 specifically relates to section 4.2.3 of the Registrar 
Accreditation Agreement.

There may be other provisions in registry/registrar agreements that would 
allow for addressing the mis-use of domains. Margie provided a 
presentation on GNSO scope and consensus policies to the Working Group 
some time ago (see presentation attached) and she's happy, once the WG 
resumes its meetings, to refresh everyone's mind in relation to this 
presentation and narrow in on those other provisions that might allow for 
addressing the mis-use of domain name registrations.

In view of this, the group might want to consider removing the sentence 
'These are largely out of scope for policy-making' from slide 5 and taking 
out the last bullet on slide 7 'Doubts about whether ICANN has the power 
to force contracted parties to suspend domain names for malicious uses'.

With best regards,

Marika

------ Forwarded Message
From: Greg Aaron <gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:18:41 -0800
To: Mike Rodenbaugh <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <
gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [gnso-rap-dt] For your review - Nairobi presentation

Or, using wordings in the Issues Report, it could say, ?Staff and the 
General Counsel?s office stated in Issues report: ?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.??
 
All best,
--Greg
 

From: Greg Aaron [mailto:gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 3:44 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 


------ End of Forwarded Message[attachment "GNSO Scope and Consensus 
Policy Presentation FINAL.pdf" deleted by Martin C SUTTON/GMO/HSBC] 


************************************************************
HSBC Holdings plc
Registered Office: 8 Canada Square, London E14 5HQ, United Kingdom
Registered in England number 617987
************************************************************


-----------------------------------------
SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT!

This E-mail is confidential.                      
                                                  
It may also be legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you
may not copy, forward, disclose or use any part of it. If you have
received this message in error, please delete it and all copies
from your system and notify the sender immediately by return
E-mail.                     
                                                  
Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely secure,
error or virus-free. The sender does not accept liability for any
errors or omissions.