[CCWG-ACCT] Attempt to summarize discussion regarding Mission and Contract

[Burr, Becky]

Malcolm said:

* NB: This is an important point, with important ramifications. ICANN is
not prohibited by this clause from any form of regulation of domain
registrants at all. That may disappoint some (perhaps in civil society).
I think it shows that this clause is balanced.

This is an important point.  So a blog may be covered by the prohibition but the blogger/registrant is not?  ICANN can obligate registrars to impose and enforce terms and conditions related to the registration of a name - eg, in order to register you must provide accurate Whois data and agree to use the name in compliance with applicable law. But ICANN cannot require a registrar to suspend a registration where the use/service is alleged to be operating in violation of applicable law (eg operating an online gambling site in a jurisdiction that prohibits gambling).  The registrar would have the choice to suspend (assuming it reserved that right) but not the obligation?  

Another example.  As part of a community application for an adult TLD, the applicant says that registrants may not display animations of children under 18.  In some countries such displays would be entirely legal.   Suppose the applicant further commits to suspend registrations found to be in violation of this prohibition. In this case ICANN could require the registry operator to make the prohibition a condition of registration.  Could ICANN require the registry to make good on its commitment to suspend?



Sent from my iPad

> On Nov 11, 2015, at 8:14 AM, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm at linx.net> wrote:
> 
> Malcolm.
> 
> * NB: This is an important point, with important ramifications. ICANN is
> not prohibited by this clause from any form of regulation of domain
> registrants at all. That may disappoint some (perhaps in civil society).
> I think it shows that this clause is balanced.