[CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users

Fri Apr 21 03:30:33 UTC 2023

Dear Mike,

the discussion was a brief one, on the ISOC policy mailing list. A 
question asked was "should PIR comment", and the response was that a 
Registry usually does not comment on another Registry's Registry 
agreement. Andrew Sullivan directed the discussion to go to the ICANN 
Public Comment.
Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 20/04/2023 20:56, mike palage.com wrote:
>
> Hello Olivier,
>
> Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list?  I am 
> a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list.
>
> That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who 
> has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, 
> the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement 
> is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry.
>
> Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar 
> agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision 
> from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see 
> https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf
>
> Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or 
> cancel the Domain
>
> Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules.
>
> Section  3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT
>
> Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations:
>
> 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact 
> information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the 
> Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and 
> (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant 
> represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the 
> Registry shall be a functioning e-mail
>
> address;
>
> 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any 
> third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including 
> discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or 
> political view;
>
> 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any 
> unlawful purpose.
>
> Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT
>
> The Registrant represents and warrants that:
>
> 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry 
> when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar;
>
> 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name 
> registration process is true, complete, and accurate;
>
> 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful 
> purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party;
>
> 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. 
> is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful;
>
> 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions 
> and any and all applicable Rules.
>
> Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at 
> EURid were much more succinct.
>
> Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed 
> mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other 
> provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me 
> angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our 
> initial assessment and concerns.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael
>
> *From:* CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org> *On Behalf Of * Olivier MJ 
> Crépin-Leblond via CPWG
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM
> *To:* Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users
>
> Forgot the reference:
> https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-27mar20-en.pdf
>
> On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
>
>     Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that
>     the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM
>     Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many
>     ripples back then.
>
>     He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time
>     when they get a suitable
>     court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details.
>
>     Kindest regards,
>
>     Olivier
>
>
>     On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote:
>
>         https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-would-allow-any-government-in-the-world-to-seize-domain-names/
>
>         Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental
>         involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested
>         interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can
>         negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed
>         modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for
>         arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech
>         unwanted by a government.
>
>         BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for
>         concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media
>         rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it?
>
>         This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with
>         the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the
>         issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to
>         serve.
>
>         Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest
>         on something that actually matters?
>
>         Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If
>         the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there.
>
>
>         Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
>
>         @evanleibovitch / @el56
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>
>         CPWG mailing list
>
>         CPWG at icann.org
>
>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
>         _______________________________________________
>
>         By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20230421/0146d288/attachment.html>