Circumvention of The Two Points Is Not A Confusion But A Violation

["Dominik Filipp" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>]

The circumvention of the two points mentioned in the 'Notice of Intent
to Issue Advisory Regarding the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy'
document is explicitly prohibited by the existing 'Policy on Transfer of
Registrations between Registrars' agreement valid for all Registrars as
of 12 July 2004.

In section 'A. Holder-Authorized Transfers', paragraph '3. Obligations
of the Registrar of Record' it reads

* * *

"...
Upon denying a transfer request for any of the following reasons, the
Registrar of Record must provide the Registered Name Holder and the
potential Gaining Registrar with the reason for denial. The Registrar of
Record may deny a transfer request ONLY in the following specific
instances:

1. Evidence of fraud

2. UDRP action

3. Court order by a court of competent jurisdiction

4. Reasonable dispute over the identity of the Registered Name Holder or
Administrative Contact

5. No payment for previous registration period (including credit card
charge-backs) if the domain name is past its expiration date or for
previous or current registration periods if the domain name has not yet
expired. In all such cases, however, the domain name must be put into
"Registrar Hold" status by the Registrar of Record prior to the denial
of transfer

6. Express written objection to the transfer from the Transfer Contact.
(e.g. - email, fax, paper document or other processes by which the
Transfer Contact has expressly and voluntarily objected through opt-in
means)

7. A domain name was already in "lock status" provided that the
Registrar provides a readily accessible and reasonable means for the
Registered Name Holder to remove the lock status

8. A domain name is in the first 60 days of an initial registration
period.

9. A domain name is within 60 days (or a lesser period to be determined)
after being transferred (apart from being transferred back to the
original Registrar in cases where both Registrars so agree and/or where
a decision in the dispute resolution process so directs).


Instances when the requested change of Registrar MAY NOT be denied
include, but are not limited to:

a) Nonpayment for a pending or future registration period.

b) No response from the Registered Name Holder or Administrative
Contact.

c) Domain name in Registrar Lock Status, unless the Registered Name
Holder is provided with the reasonable opportunity and ability to unlock
the domain name prior to the Transfer Request.

d) Domain name registration period time constraints, other than during
the first 60 days of initial registration or during the first 60 days
after a registrar transfer.

e) General payment defaults between Registrar and business
partners/affiliates in cases where the Registered Name Holder for the
domain in question has paid for the registration.
..."

* * *

I. Viewing the mentioned rules, denying transfer due to 'non-payment of
fees for pending or future registration periods during the Auto-Renew
Grace Period' is in direct violation of points 5. and a) above. Point a)
clearly states that 'nonpayment for a pending or future registration
period', taken as is, that is, as a general statement without
exceptions, does not give any legitimate right to Registrar of Record to
deny domain transfer of domain in question that is properly registered
and paid for during a given registration period.

II. Denying domain transfer due to WHOIS modification has no legitimate
support in the Obligations either. Modification of WHOIS data by no
means establish 'Reasonable dispute over the identity of the Registered
Name Holder...', which is the only legitimate reason of denial related
to the WHOIS data mentioned in the Obligations (even this reason is
partly weakened by point b). Reasonable dispute is a process of
investigation and communication between Registrar and Registrant, and/or
other legitimate/legal parties involved, in order to reveal or verify
the identity of actual domain owner. The process is backed up by at
least minimum of evidence recorded such as traceable history of emails
sent and exchanged between the parties, etc. Such a process has nothing
to do with a mere act of simple data modification.


Go Daddy's "Transfer Prohibition Period"

The term "Transfer Prohibition Period" is part of Go Daddy's 'Domain
Name Change Registrant Agreement' described in paragraph '1. Go Daddy's
Role in This Transaction' therein, which imposes additional 60-day
transfer-deny period upon Registrant data modification. As this period
is 'registration period time constraints, other than during the first 60
days of initial registration or during the first 60 days after a
registrar transfer' as stated in point d) and also points 8. and 9. in
the Obligations, domain transfers may not be denied due to the 'transfer
prohibition period', as it arbitrarily extends the fixed strict set of
enumerated allowable conditions under which transfers can ONLY be
denied.
As keeping the WHOIS data accurate and up to date is obligatory, honest
Registrants are forced to agree with the 'Domain Name Change Registrant
Agreement' before actualizing their registrant records and thus are
pushed into entering additional transfer-deny period during which
transfer of such affected domains is impossible. This can be a serious
problem, particularly, when the actualization is needed just as transfer
request is in progress.

To consolidate this with the Obligations Go Daddy should accelerate
reimplementation of this feature to be optional and not mandatory.


Dominik Filipp, a GA list member