[bc-gnso] PEDNAR (post expiration domain name recovery) PDP needs a constituency statement from us
icann at rodenbaugh.com
Thu Sep 24 01:30:43 UTC 2009
Thanks to both Mikes for their efforts on this.
Fine with me if the BC reasserts our concern with inaccurate WHOIS, even if
the comments are late. Late comments are frequently put in. But really, I
do not see much impact possible with that comment in this Working Group at
all. If somebody comes up with better comments, I would prefer to post
something more substantive and relevant to the WG questions. Mike Palage
made several other good points in his earlier post, that we might all gel
548 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 1:03 PM
To: Michael D. Palage
Cc: 'BC gnso'
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] PEDNAR (post expiration domain name recovery) PDP
needs a constituency statement from us
just a process update, we're just wrapping up the PEDNAR call right
now and it looks like only 2 constituencies got statements in on
time. so we all have a 2-week "dog ate the homework" extension.
Berry Cobb is pulling together a call among the BC members on the
PEDNAR working group (Berry, Mike, Phil Corwin, me) to hammer on this
and figure out a process to get something by you for review. Palage
is off to a great start with this post.
On Sep 22, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Michael D. Palage wrote:
> Philip/Mike R,
> In the interest of preserving the BC position on this topic, I can
> report that the registry constituency will be submitting a comment
> after the
> close of the formal comment period. Therefore, if we did submit a late
> response we would not be alone.
> I would like to submit the following statement for consideration to
> group, friendly amendments welcomed.
> While the Business Constituency supports competition and innovation
> the marketplace, these principles should not compromise the rights of
> registrants with regard to open, transparent and predicable practices
> concerning expiring domain names. The Business Constituency would
> like to
> thank ICANN staff for their support of the PEDNR Working Group to
> date. Two
> staff members that have provided critical support to date are Marika
> Konings, who will be overseeing a registrar survey to provide a more
> accurate picture of the expiring domain name market and William
> an Auditor from the ICANN Contractual Compliance Team, for his work in
> accessing registrar compliance with regard to the Expired Domain
> Policy (EDDP).
> While the BC will await these survey results and other additional fact
> finding prior to formulating a more detailed position statement,
> there is
> one important point that the BC would like to make at this time in
> connection with the accuracy of Whois data. The BC has long
> advocated in
> support of increased accuracy of whois data. The preliminary work of
> Work Group appears to indicate that registrar practices in
> connection with
> the transfer of domain names post expiration may result in
> inaccurate whois
> data that may materially impact a trademark owners right to enforce
> rights through the UDRP.
> The BC apologizes for the untimely submission of this comment, but its
> members and leadership look forward to meaningfully participating in
> upcoming forum at the ICANN annual meeting in Seoul.
> Best regards,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On
> Behalf Of
> Philip Sheppard
> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 8:41 AM
> To: 'BC gnso'
> Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] PEDNAR (post expiration domain name recovery)
> needs a constituency statement from us
> you are I agree.
> I believe it IS an issue but regret the inaction to date by other BC
> Why could you not have spent the time writing your last e-mail by
> drafting a
- - - - - - - - -
handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook,
More information about the Bc-gnso