<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><![if !supportAnnotations]><style id="dynCom" type="text/css"><!-- --></style><script language="JavaScript"><!--
function msoCommentShow(anchor_id, com_id)
{
if(msoBrowserCheck())
{
c = document.all(com_id);
a = document.all(anchor_id);
if (null != c && null == c.length && null != a && null == a.length)
{
var cw = c.offsetWidth;
var ch = c.offsetHeight;
var aw = a.offsetWidth;
var ah = a.offsetHeight;
var x = a.offsetLeft;
var y = a.offsetTop;
var el = a;
while (el.tagName != "BODY")
{
el = el.offsetParent;
x = x + el.offsetLeft;
y = y + el.offsetTop;
}
var bw = document.body.clientWidth;
var bh = document.body.clientHeight;
var bsl = document.body.scrollLeft;
var bst = document.body.scrollTop;
if (x + cw + ah / 2 > bw + bsl && x + aw - ah / 2 - cw >= bsl )
{ c.style.left = x + aw - ah / 2 - cw; }
else
{ c.style.left = x + ah / 2; }
if (y + ch + ah / 2 > bh + bst && y + ah / 2 - ch >= bst )
{ c.style.top = y + ah / 2 - ch; }
else
{ c.style.top = y + ah / 2; }
c.style.visibility = "visible";
} } }
function msoCommentHide(com_id)
{
if(msoBrowserCheck())
{
c = document.all(com_id);
if (null != c && null == c.length)
{
c.style.visibility = "hidden";
c.style.left = -1000;
c.style.top = -1000;
} }
}
function msoBrowserCheck()
{
ms = navigator.appVersion.indexOf("MSIE");
vers = navigator.appVersion.substring(ms + 5, ms + 6);
ie4 = (ms > 0) && (parseInt(vers) >= 4);
return ie4;
}
if (msoBrowserCheck())
{
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomanchor","background: infobackground");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomoff","display: none");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","visibility: hidden");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","position: absolute");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","top: -1000");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","left: -1000");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","width: 33%");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","background: infobackground");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","color: infotext");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","border-top: 1pt solid threedlightshadow");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","border-right: 2pt solid threedshadow");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","border-bottom: 2pt solid threedshadow");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","border-left: 1pt solid threedlightshadow");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","padding: 3pt 3pt 3pt 3pt");
document.styleSheets.dynCom.addRule(".msocomtxt","z-index: 100");
}
// --></script><![endif]><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:530722583;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1649738692 201916417 201916419 201916421 201916417 201916419 201916421 201916417 201916419 201916421;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:38.5pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Hi Peter,
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I appreciate your comments.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">In my experience, the current language in the 2009 RAA
</span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">3.7.7.3 Any Registered Name Holder that intends to license use of a domain name to a third party is nonetheless the Registered Name Holder of record and is responsible for providing its own full contact
information and for providing and updating accurate technical and administrative contact information adequate to facilitate timely resolution of any problems that arise in connection with the Registered Name. A Registered Name Holder licensing use of a Registered
Name according to this provision shall accept liability for harm caused by wrongful use of the Registered Name, unless it promptly discloses the current contact information provided by the licensee and the identity of the licensee to a party providing the
Registered Name Holder reasonable evidence of actionable harm. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">has not been tested in the US courts as far as I know let alone in every major jurisdiction in the world. If we move
forward with the recommendation that we agreed upon in Dakar my opinion is that the best we can expect is for litigation to clarify this in a local court. There will be no urgency or incentive for a proxy service provider to change behavior and act responsibly.
The proxy service provider is considered the Registered Name Holder now and most do not respond promptly to a request for the licensee’s contact information so if the following is removed from 3.7.7.3
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">unless it promptly discloses the current contact information provided by the licensee and the identity of the licensee to a party
providing the Registered Name Holder reasonable evidence of actionable harm<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Also what is the definition of “reasonable evidence of actionable harm” ? I think that would differ by jurisdiction<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I do not have any faith that it will change the status quo.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I wish I was able to argue this more eloquently in Dakar but I feel that since most proxy services are controlled
by an ICANN accredited registrar they should be held to at least the most minimum standard to respond within a specified time to an inquiry.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I sent the following revised language to Kathy and James earlier today for their input.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Proxy Recommendation
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From 2009 RAA 1.20 "Affiliated Registrar" is another ICANN accredited registrar that operates under a common controlling interest.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Definitions
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Affiliate retail proxy service provider
</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">is an entity that operates under a common controlling interest of a registrar. “<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Retail proxy service provider</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> – provides a proxy service with little or no knowledge of the entity
or individual requesting the service beyond their ability to pay and their agreement to the general terms and conditions.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Limited proxy service provider</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> – provides a proxy service for an entity or individual in which there
is an ongoing business relationship bound by a contract that is specific to the relationship.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> Recommendation
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">1) a registrar is required to disclose their relationship with a Retail proxy service provider to ICANN. A retail proxy service provider should follow best practice guidelines
developed by the community (ICANN, GNSO or whatever group would be most likely to address this issue) . The best practices may include the following:
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a style="mso-comment-reference:j_1;mso-comment-date:20111127T1805"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-line-height-alt:5.0pt"><span style="mso-comment-continuation:1"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">a. standardised relay and reveal processes and timeframes;<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in"><span style="mso-comment-continuation:1"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">a.1) establish a standardized process for requesting contact information for a proxy registration<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in"><span style="mso-comment-continuation:1"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">a.2) 24 hour response to provide requested contact information when requested by Law Enforcement;
<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in"><span style="mso-comment-continuation:1"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">a.3) 5 day business response when requested by a non LE third party</span></span><span class="MsoCommentReference"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><![if !supportAnnotations]><a class="msocomanchor" id="_anchor_1" onmouseover="msoCommentShow('_anchor_1','_com_1')" onmouseout="msoCommentHide('_com_1')" href="#_msocom_1" language="JavaScript" name="_msoanchor_1">[j1]</a><![endif]> </span></span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_msoanchor_1" id="_anchor_1"></a><a href="http://email12.secureserver.net/#_msocom_1" target="_self"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[j1]</span></a><span class="MsoCommentReference"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></span><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-line-height-alt:5.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">b. guidance on the appropriate level of publicly available information on the registrant;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-line-height-alt:5.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">c. maintenance of a dedicated and available abuse point of contact;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-line-height-alt:5.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">d. public disclosure of contact details and the physical address of the retail proxy service provider; and<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-line-height-alt:5.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">e. retail proxy service providers to validate registrant contact information.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">a clear definition of the meaning of the proxy -
<b><i>Proxy Services</i></b> register the domain name, is the registered name holder but license it to another for use<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-line-height-alt:5.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">2. Now 4? The best practice guidelines should be developed in close consultation with the GAC, privacy advocates, law
enforcement, and other interested stakeholders. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-line-height-alt:5.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">3. Now 5? ICANN should develop an incentive for the retail proxy service providers that adopt the best practice guidelines
within a specified time frame. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1F497D">I have also included comments under your comments below.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1F497D">Best regards,
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1F497D">Susan
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Nettlefold, Peter [mailto:Peter.Nettlefold@dbcde.gov.au]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, November 27, 2011 5:30 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Seth M Reiss; Susan Kawaguchi; 'Emily Taylor'<br>
<b>Cc:</b> rt4-whois@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [Rt4-whois] Proxy provider recommendation 112311 susan draft(2).doc [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Hello all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Thanks to Susan and Seth for keeping this important conversation moving.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It seems clear that this is one of the most difficult parts of our report, in part because we are having to consider and balance two important,
high-profile and sometimes conflicting needs.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I’ve put comments directly into your email Susan, in a different font and colour, to try to explain my thinking on your points. I’ve tried to do
this as simply and clearly as possible, and hope that by being so direct we can get closer to the heart of the issue.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I hope this explains where I’m coming from, and helps to move this conversation forward.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Cheers,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Peter<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Seth M Reiss [mailto:seth.reiss@lex-ip.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, 27 November 2011 3:41 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Susan Kawaguchi'; Nettlefold, Peter; 'Emily Taylor'<br>
<b>Cc:</b> rt4-whois@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [Rt4-whois] Proxy provider recommendation 112311 susan draft(2).doc [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Susan<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">If the chain of legal responsibilities were clarified, don’t you think there would be an immediate chilling effect on the industry? Only those registrars willing
to go out of business as a result of entering into a retail proxy relationship with a naughty registrant would continue the retail proxy practice. The responsible ones I would expect to stop the practice.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Seth<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Susan Kawaguchi<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, November 25, 2011 7:24 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nettlefold, Peter; Emily Taylor<br>
<b>Cc:</b> rt4-whois@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Rt4-whois] Proxy provider recommendation 112311 susan draft(2).doc [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Hello Peter,
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I am not proposing to change the privacy service recommendations although I did use language from the agreed upon recommendation since I thought it was a good
place to start. Also I do not understand why there is concern with regulating proxy registrations and no concern with regulating privacy registrations.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">To my mind, in important ways these two types of services are quite distinct. In the case of a privacy service, it should be clear from the WHOIS record (inaccuracy aside) who is legally responsible
for a domain from the outset. There should be no question as to finding a responsible entity on who to serve notice etc, as this data is not hidden/withheld with a privacy service. What a privacy service should instead do is restrict sensitive personal information
about that responsible entity from general public availability. With a proxy service, in the current regime, the identity of the responsible entity is not clear, and it appears that this aspect has been gamed or otherwise abused. It is also not clear to me
what the situation would be even if this were more tightly regulated. As soon as we say, ‘you’re responsible, except…’, it seems that we risk some form of uncertainty, delay and gaming. If we want to do that, we would need to be very careful about how we address
those risks.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I did raise this before the November 9<sup>th</sup> call but was not able to participate on that call so I understand your concern that is this may appear last
minute. II have given this so much thought over the last 6 months and you saw how uncomfortable I was with not addressing the proxy issues in our discussions in Dakar. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">My concern with the ‘last minute’ issue is not that it hasn’t come up (I hope I didn’t suggest that), and as you know I am very interested to make sure we get this right. It’s just that we’re discussing
actual text very late in the piece – and again, I want to make sure we get it right.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I simply do not feel that recommending to ICANN that they completely ignore the proxy issue is the way we should be proceeding.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">I don’t think we’re proposing that ICANN ‘ignore’ proxies. We all acknowledge that they will likely exist in one form or another regardless of what we do: the question is on what basis. In Dakar,
we agreed that we would recommend that ICANN not only remove the current provisions which endorse proxies, but also make an affirmative statement to clarify the legal chain of responsibilities – i.e. from ICANN’s point of view, the buck stops with the registered
name holder. Rather than ignoring, I would see this as saying something like: ‘if you’re out there doing this, ICANN sees you as legally responsible’.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D">
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D">Many courts around the world do not care what ICANN considers legal or illegal, ICANN cannot create law.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">My aim with this recommendation is to target the proxy services run by a registrar. They have a direct contractual relationship with ICANN. The argument
that we do not understand all the contractual agreements involved in a proxy service makes sense for deeply integrated proxy services where the registrant and service have agreed upon contractual elements. The “retail” proxy service which is offered to anyone
who will pay and agreed to the TOS for the most part are owned or controlled by a registrar. Although, we have to be careful to not try and regulate any other business the registrar may enter into the proxy service directly relates to the most critical information
of the domain name registration which should be controlled by ICANN. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">I’m interested in whether a ‘retail’ proxy service would continue to offer the same sorts of service if they were held responsible for the domain. What would a registrar do if a domain they had registered
in their own name was used for criminal purposes, and the RAA no longer explicitly offered the option of pointing the finger elsewhere, but instead affirmatively stated that they were responsible?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The NORC study estimates that proxy registrations may be used in as much as 25% of the .com registrations. That is a significant number. Currently, several
registrars run proxy services that are responsive and professional. GoDaddy is the gold standard from my experience. They have very well defined processes and when you run into a proxy registration that is a concern I know exactly what I have to do to request
the information. The registrant is protected but if they are acting badly then there is a standardized process for receiving the website owners information.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Below I pulled out from your email<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">“Much of this revolves around the question of whether tighter regulation of proxies is needed, or whether simply removing the endorsement and clarifying
the chain of legal responsibilities would be more effective.”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Clarifying the chain of legal responsibilities leaves little recourse for someone impacted by a domain name serving content with a proxy service
registration on the WHOIS. If the proxy service provider does not want to reveal the information ( as many refuse to do now) then the only recourse is to file litigation against the proxy service provider.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">If we went ahead with our Dakar recommendations, I expect that filing against the registered name holder would be the first action instead of the last recourse.</span><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D">
Filing litigation against a registrant is always the last resort. I have been involved with domain name enforcement actions for over 12 years but only involved in 2 litigations. Currently we have a typo squatting litigation and with over 100 domain name
registrations that are proxy registrations. Just a few of the proxy service providers have been beating down our doors to provide the licensee contact information.
</span><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Then when the WHOIS record changes midstream, they are forced to go back to court to amend the complaint. It is extremely burdensome and expensive.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">Would this still be the case? If ICANN clarified that the responsible entity was the registered name holder, and removed any caveats etc, what would be the basis for changing the WHOIS
record midstream? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">There has been some litigation that has held the proxy service provider legally responsible but nothing that has had a chilling effect on the industry.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">If in the current ambiguous contractual environment some proxy service providers have been held legally responsible, wouldn’t what we have proposed significantly increase the likelihood of that?
Wouldn’t this in turn have a flow on ‘chilling’ effect on the use of proxies? <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I cannot open James document on my laptop but once I have a copy I will review his latest revisions.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Best regards,
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Susan<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Nettlefold, Peter [mailto:Peter.Nettlefold@dbcde.gov.au]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, November 24, 2011 9:59 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Emily Taylor<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Susan Kawaguchi; rt4-whois@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [Rt4-whois] Proxy provider recommendation 112311 susan draft(2).doc [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Thanks Emily, that’s very useful, and I think I understand where its coming from.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I have a few follow on questions, as I’m trying to understand the big picture/strategy, and to try to work through the new proposal fully as this
is a key area of interest for me. To be honest, I’m a bit nervous about reopening such a major issue so late in the piece, with only limited time to think through and discuss all the implications. That said, I’m not opposed, just cautious.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">In terms of questions: is the intention to retain our ‘privacy’ recommendations from Dakar? i.e. so that we would in effect have three different
arrangements: i.e. privacy, ‘known’ proxies, and ‘unknown’ proxies? I ask this because if we are to recommend the establishment of parallel ‘known proxy’ and ‘privacy’ regimes, we would need to clearly explain and justify any differences between the two (I
note that many of the recommendations we agreed for privacy services have been adopted for the proposed proxy recommendations). I expect that a key question we would face is why we were advocating for two different types of privacy-related services? In what
circumstances are privacy services not sufficient? Understanding the reason for this may address some of my concerns.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Separate to the question of privacy services, we also need to consider the implications of endorsing proxy services. In Dakar, we discussed at
length the risks of ICANN explicitly acknowledging (and effectively endorsing) the practice of completely limiting access to a registrant’s identity. I had thought that was one of the reasons why we agreed that ICANN should not endorse this practice, and instead
that we would argue that:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:38.5pt;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2">
<![if !supportLists]><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">the full rights and responsibilities of the registrant should accrue to the registered name holder; and<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:38.5pt;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2">
<![if !supportLists]><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">ICANN should endorse and regulate ‘privacy’ services which could limit the availability of
<u>sensitive</u> personal data, without completely obfuscating the registrant’s identity.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">This approach seemed to address the privacy concerns expressed by a range of stakeholders, and to clarify (perhaps for the first time) the chain
of contractual rights and responsibilities.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Much of this revolves around the question of whether tighter regulation of proxies is needed, or whether simply removing the endorsement and clarifying
the chain of legal responsibilities would be more effective. In effect, the new proposal is to advocate the replacement of one mechanism which attempts to regulate proxies (i.e. the current RAA provisions) with another. The intent is obviously to have a tighter
set of regulations this time, to reduce gaming/abuse etc. At one level this seems logical, but I am concerned that by introducing doubt into the chain of rights and responsibilities, anything we then do will be like trying to patch a leak that we in effect
created. Given that both previous versions of the RAA have tried the endorsement/regulation route with very limited success, I think we would need a strong case to propose a third attempt at this approach as the best way to go. Do we think that this is something
we can achieve in practice, and why is it better than the simpler alternative?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I hope I’m not making this unnecessarily complicated – I just want to make sure that we don’t make a rushed change that has not been fully discussed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I look forward to the views of other team members on this issue.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Cheers,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Peter<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Emily Taylor [mailto:emily@emilytaylor.eu]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, 24 November 2011 8:30 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nettlefold, Peter<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Susan Kawaguchi; rt4-whois@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Rt4-whois] Proxy provider recommendation 112311 susan draft(2).doc [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-AU">Hi Peter<br>
<br>
As it's Thanksgiving, our US colleagues will (should) be offline for a couple of days.<br>
<br>
My understanding from last night's call is that our proposal is to combine these proxy recommendations with the ones from Dakar. In other words, instead of saying "we never acknowledge proxies" we say this. Susan explained that they are currently working
on defining what is meant by a proxy, and as you rightly point out there are different flavours of proxy. There is the "deep" arrangement based on an ongoing trusting relationship (eg solicitor, client) where a proxy might not be obvious. My understanding
is that we're not attempting to lift the veil on these. They are not viewed as problematic.<br>
<br>
What is viewed as within the ambit of these new draft recommendations are the higher volume, commercialised proxy services, where there is not really a pre-existing relationship between registrant and proxy provider, but this is a low cost add on at the point
of registration. The two parties don't really know each other that well. These are the ones we're hoping to describe in our definitions, and they are the target of these recommendations.<br>
<br>
I hope that this makes it clear, but obviously I do recommend you listen to Susan's description of their thinking from the audio when it's up.<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
<br>
Emily<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU">On 24 November 2011 02:32, Nettlefold, Peter <<a href="mailto:Peter.Nettlefold@dbcde.gov.au">Peter.Nettlefold@dbcde.gov.au</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">Hi Susan and all,</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">Thanks very much to all who worked on this new series of recommendations.</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">I’m sorry I missed the teleconference this morning, but just wanted to see if I understand this proposal correctly.</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">In short, is this a supplement to the position we agreed in Dakar? i.e. will the situation generally be that the registered name holder
assumes all rights and responsibilities (as we discussed in Dakar), but in a special subset of cases (i.e. where the registrar clearly knows that a ‘proxy’ is being used) then some special rules apply?
</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">Or to put it another way, will we be recommending that there should be special new rules for ‘known’ proxies (however defined), and in all
other cases we do not acknowledge proxies?</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">I’m sorry if this was discussed this morning, but I’m just trying to understand the position.</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">As there isn’t a recording up yet that I’ve seen, any advice on whether other team members have already commented on this would be appreciated.</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">Cheers,</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D">Peter</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#1F497D"> </span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
<a href="mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Susan Kawaguchi<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, 24 November 2011 6:18 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org" target="_blank">rt4-whois@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Rt4-whois] Proxy provider recommendation 112311 susan draft(2).doc</span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-AU"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hello All,
<span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I apologize for the delay in sending this and that it is still in rough draft. The attached document contains Kathy’s revisions and comments to my original proposed recommendation.
I have added proposed definitions for the terms we are struggling with. These came out of discussions between James and I.
<span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I feel that we must provide a clear recommendation on the proxy issue but I personally seem to keep moving towards drafting policy. I am hoping we will have time to discuss on
the call today as I have several questions for the team. <span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Susan
<span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p><span lang="EN-AU"><br>
<b>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------</b><br>
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) <br>
and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized <br>
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the <br>
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all <br>
copies of the original message. <br>
<br>
This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. <br>
MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway products please visit
<a href="http://www.axway.com" target="_blank">www.axway.com</a>.<br>
<br>
<b>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-AU"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Rt4-whois mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Rt4-whois@icann.org">Rt4-whois@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-AU"><br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span style="border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in"><img border="0" width="100" height="100" id="_x0000_i1031" src="cid:image001.jpg@01CCAD2C.080FEF10" alt="Image removed by sender."></span><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="margin-left:40.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#CC33CC">
</span></u><span lang="EN-AU" style="color:#993399"><br>
</span><span lang="EN-AU"><br>
<span style="color:#999999">76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK<br>
t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (0)7540 049 322<br>
<a href="mailto:emily@emilytaylor.eu" target="_blank">emily@emilytaylor.eu</a> <br>
<br>
<b><a href="http://www.etlaw.co.uk" target="_blank">www.etlaw.co.uk</a></b><br>
<br>
Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713.</span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-AU"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-AU"><br>
<b>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------</b><br>
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) <br>
and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized <br>
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the <br>
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all <br>
copies of the original message. <br>
<br>
This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. <br>
MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway products please visit www.axway.com.<br>
<br>
<b>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-AU"><br>
<b>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------</b><br>
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) <br>
and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized <br>
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the <br>
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all <br>
copies of the original message. <br>
<br>
This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. <br>
MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway products please visit www.axway.com.<br>
<br>
<b>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="mso-element:comment-list"><![if !supportAnnotations]>
<hr class="msocomoff" align="left" size="1" width="33%">
<![endif]>
<div style="mso-element:comment"><![if !supportAnnotations]>
<div id="_com_1" class="msocomtxt" language="JavaScript" onmouseover="msoCommentShow('_anchor_1','_com_1')" onmouseout="msoCommentHide('_com_1')">
<![endif]><span style="mso-comment-author:jbladel"><![if !supportAnnotations]><a name="_msocom_1"></a><![endif]></span>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_msocom_1"></a><span class="MsoCommentReference"><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black"> <a href="http://email12.secureserver.net/#_msoanchor_1" target="_self">[j1]</a></span></span><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black">We
should not be overly prescriptive and attempt to develop the Best Practices in this report. For example DBP is already circulating Best Practices outside of ICANN, and some of our proposals meet or exceed those listed here.</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<![if !supportAnnotations]></div>
<![endif]></div>
</div>
</body>
</html>