[Gnso-epdp-team] ICANN org question response
leon.sanchez at board.icann.org
Wed Nov 14 16:00:52 UTC 2018
While I see your point, may I suggest that we focus on the items we’ve been working on in relation with?
Access is definitely something we, as community, will need to address but for now my feeling of the discussions is that we have agreed to keep these topics (temp-spec and access) separate. I could be misinterpreting the general feeling, of course, and apologize in advance if I am in fact doing so.
Enviado desde mi iPhone
El nov. 14, 2018, a la(s) 3:54 p. m., Lindsay Hamilton-Reid <lindsay.hamilton-reid at fasthosts.com> escribió:
> Hi Caitlin
> Thank you for the clarification. However, when you state “maintenance of and access to accurate and up-to-date information concerning domain name registrations” is one of the topics on which ICANN may enforce consensus policies, who will have access and on what basis? While I appreciate the ICANN may have the right to draft and enforce certain policies, any such policy must be in accordance with applicable law. Isn’t that exactly what we are trying to do in this EPDP?
> Many thanks
> Lindsay Hamilton-Reid
> Senior Legal Counsel
> Direct: +44 (0)1452 509145 | Mobile: +44 (0)7720 091147 | Email: Lindsay.Hamilton-Reid at 1and1.co.uk
> www.fasthosts.co.uk www.1and1.co.uk
> © 2015 All rights reserved. Fasthosts is the trading name of Fasthosts Internet Limited. Company registration no. 03656438. Registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Discovery House, 154 Southgate Street, Gloucester, GL1 2EX. VAT no. 720821857. 1&1 is the trading name of 1&1 Internet Limited. Company registration no. 03953678. Registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Discovery House, 154 Southgate Street, Gloucester, GL1 2EX. VAT no. 752539027.
> This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disclose, copy or use any part of it - please delete all copies immediately and notify 1&1 on 0844 335 1211 or Fasthosts on 0333 0142 700. Any statements, opinions or information in this message are provided by the author, not on behalf of 1&1 and/or Fasthosts, unless subsequently confirmed by an individual who is authorised to represent 1&1 and/or Fasthosts.
> From: Gnso-epdp-team [mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Caitlin Tubergen
> Sent: 14 November 2018 13:17
> To: gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] ICANN org question response
> Dear EPDP Team,
> In response to a question posed by the EPDP Team to ICANN org on Thursday, 8 November, please find the following response:
> QUESTION: Is making the natural vs legal distinction in WHOIS within the picket fence, i.e., a suitable topic for policy discussion?
> RESPONSE : Yes, access to gTLD registration data generally is one of the allowed topics for consensus policy as set forth in ICANN Bylaws and registry and registrar agreements. (That list of topics is referred to by some as “the picket fence”). Please refer to Annex G-1 and G-2 of the ICANN Bylaws as well as Specification 1 Section 1.3.4 of the Base Registry Agreement and the Consensus Policies and Temporary Policies Specification of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement, which provide that: “maintenance of and access to accurate and up-to-date information concerning domain name registrations” is one of the topics on which ICANN may enforce consensus policies.
> Thank you.
> Best regards,
> Marika, Berry and Caitlin
> Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
> Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gnso-epdp-team