[GNSO-Accuracy-ST] Identity Proofing Clarity - Follow Up Homework

[STROUNGI Melina]

Many thanks Michael for raising this point and Volker for your explanation.

Even if these are rare cases, I can indeed see the link between ‘inaccuracy’ and ‘false identity details’ as explained in Volker’s message, so I believe it would be a useful element to keep in mind in our discussions on the accuracy definition.

I would find it both useful and interesting to know more about this so I am open to raising any questions to ICANN that our accuracy team believes could shed some further light.

Best,
Melina

From: GNSO-Accuracy-ST <gnso-accuracy-st-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Volker Greimann
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 1:19 PM
To: michael at palage.com
Cc: gnso-accuracy-st at icann.org
Subject: Re: [GNSO-Accuracy-ST] Identity Proofing Clarity - Follow Up Homework

Hi Michael,

all such investigations are based on a substantiated whois inaccuracy complaint where the complainant states that the registrant has provided false details. As this regards a potential violation of our registration agreement with the registrant we will investigate the identity of the registrant in this specific case only. The usual complaint is from the party listed in the registration record that they did not register the domain name in the first place or sold it a while ago and now found that the record was never updated by the old registrant.

That said, aside from the investigation following a substantiated inaccuracy complaint, identity of the registrant is not required under current policies. These cases are rather rare and are usually detected when the listed registrant contact receives their annual WDRP mail. In these cases we contact our customer and ask that they reach out to the registrant with the request to update the registration details.

Sincerely,
--
Volker A. Greimann
General Counsel and Policy Manager
KEY-SYSTEMS GMBH

T: +49 6894 9396901
M: +49 6894 9396851
F: +49 6894 9396851
W: www.key-systems.net<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.key-systems.net/__;!!DOxrgLBm!VheXGAoQHLhbOx658g2ewOmpnoe4Fbv1zRxGhkZCMqylXW4KUskaQkkueUk4gTCYfdnBfcHM$>

Key-Systems GmbH is a company registered at the local court of Saarbruecken, Germany with the registration no. HR B 18835
CEO: Oliver Fries and Robert Birkner

Part of the CentralNic Group PLC (LON: CNIC) a company registered in England and Wales with company number 8576358.

This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended only for the person(s) directly addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, transmission, distribution, or other forms of dissemination is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete this email with any files that may be attached.


On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 12:39 PM Michael Palage <michael at palage.com<mailto:michael at palage.com>> wrote:
Hello All,

I was reviewing my notes from yesterday’s meeting as well as reviewing some of the previous email list exchanges between and I was hoping that my Registrar colleagues could provide a little clarity, especially Volker given his participation in the 2013 RAA negotiations.

I believe what I have heard and read from my Registrar colleagues is that there is no “identity proofing” requirements in their contracts – accuracy is merely syntactical and operational. I apologizes in advance if I am mischaracterizing this and welcome any corrections. However, in Assignment #1, the follow excerpt from ICANN Organization Enforcement of Registration Data Accuracy Obligations Before and After GDPR states:

[I]f the complaint is about identity (e.g., the registrant is not who they say they are), Contractual Compliance may ask the registrar to provide further information concerning their findings and the results of their investigation specific to the facts of the complaint.

So it appears based on this excerpt that ICANN Contractual Compliance does reserve some right to inquiry about the “identity” of the Registrant. Therefore, I believe potential clarifying questions to ICANN Org could might include: does ICANN Compliance believe that it has the ability to inquiry about the “identity” of a registrant? If so, what is the contractual basis of this authority. Finally, what are the numbers associated with these types of inquiries, e.g. percentage of overall accuracy complaints and raw numbers.

Thoughts? Comments?

Best regards,

Michael






_______________________________________________
GNSO-Accuracy-ST mailing list
GNSO-Accuracy-ST at icann.org<mailto:GNSO-Accuracy-ST at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-accuracy-st<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-accuracy-st__;!!DOxrgLBm!VheXGAoQHLhbOx658g2ewOmpnoe4Fbv1zRxGhkZCMqylXW4KUskaQkkueUk4gTCYfVAR0dR3$>

_______________________________________________
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<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/privacy/policy__;!!DOxrgLBm!VheXGAoQHLhbOx658g2ewOmpnoe4Fbv1zRxGhkZCMqylXW4KUskaQkkueUk4gTCYfXzCMFcH$>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/privacy/tos__;!!DOxrgLBm!VheXGAoQHLhbOx658g2ewOmpnoe4Fbv1zRxGhkZCMqylXW4KUskaQkkueUk4gTCYfYhz0F7x$>). 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/gnso-accuracy-st/attachments/20211022/eefe915e/attachment-0001.html>