[GNSO-RPM-WG] List of URS Individual Proposals & Suggested Support Levels

George Kirikos icann at leap.com
Wed Oct 17 23:33:39 UTC 2018


Hi Paul T.,

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Paul Tattersfield <gpmgroup at gmail.com> wrote:
> George #23 doesn’t seem very sensible and I’m somewhat surprised it is
> deemed to have adequate support.
>
> As I have already pointed out the TM holder is a 3rd party looking to
> intervene in a private contract. What you are proposing is that one of the
> parties to the contract that is causing the problem should be rewarded
> proportionately to level of bad behaviour, which would have the effect of
> working in direct opposition to the intenttions of RAA 3.18.

The registrar (or registry) isn't being "rewarded" --- they're simply
recovering their compliance/admin costs associated with providing help
to providers during the dispute. Forget about domain names for a
moment, and suppose that an ISP like Verizon, Cox,  or AT&T is
approached to provide information about one of their subscribers (by
law enforcement, copyright holders, etc.). There are staff costs to do
that. Those ISPs aren't getting "rewarded" --  they're just recovering
those costs (the cost recovery needs to be "reasonable"). It doesn't
become a "profit center." Here's a cost schedule for Cox, as an
example:

https://www.cox.com/aboutus/policies/law-enforcement-and-subpoenas-information.html

"$50.00     Per account for basic information*
"$100.00  Expedited handling fee"
"$75.00/hr./staff  Requests requiring greater than 0.5 hours ($40.00 minimum)"
"Wiretap    $3,125 for 30 days"

And it's a proposal not just for registrars, it'd be for registries
too (which don't have a direct contractual relationship with
registrants, but still need to interact with providers, at least for
the URS). And the costs for registries exist, as Jonathan Frost has
noted, when this topic came up last month on the mailing list. See the
thread at:

https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2018-September/date.html
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2018-September/003263.html
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2018-September/003266.html
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2018-September/003269.html
etc.

Indeed, by allowing registrars to recover costs, just like ISPs do,
it'll strengthen 3.18 of the RAA.

Furthermore, this isn't "bad behaviour" -- prior to the matter being
discharged by the courts, or a panel, etc., the outcome of the dispute
is unknown (one can't presume the registrar's customer is guilty,
based on an accusation or request; the ISP or registrar or registry is
neutral, and not a party to the dispute). I don't know if we have any
ISPs participating in this PDP, but they might be able to provide
further data/insights.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/


More information about the GNSO-RPM-WG mailing list