[registrars] Proliferation of registrar locks
Nikolaj Nyholm
nikolajn at ascio.com
Fri Nov 12 20:52:00 UTC 2004
Ross,
You can't seriously claim that the transfer policy is not open to misuse.
Stating that "the Registered Name Holder [must be] provided with the
reasonable opportunity and ability to unlock the domain name prior to the
Transfer Request", is *not* very clear.
As I remember it, (losing) Registrars have previously successfully argued
that requiring a fax with a copy of incorporation documents and/or driver's
license is a "reasonable opportunity and ability" to authorize a transfer.
C'mon Ross, we can do better.
/n
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross at tucows.com]
> Sent: 12. november 2004 19:06
> To: Paul Lecoultre(CORE secretariat)
> Cc: Registrars at dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Proliferation of registrar locks
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 12/11/2004 12:43 PM Paul Lecoultre(CORE secretariat) noted that;
>
> | I see a major issue on this behaviour as neither the
> transfer policy nore
> | the dispute resolution policy consider this clearly.
>
> The transfer policy is very clear on the status of lock. I'm not sure
> that I see what you are getting at - or at least I'm not
> seeing the same
> thing you are - help me understand. :)
>
> - --
>
>
>
>
> ~ -rwr
>
>
>
> Contact info: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/ross
> Skydasher: A great way to start your day
> My weblog: http://www.byte.org
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)
>
> iD8DBQFBlPue6sL06XjirooRAsB2AJ9NGha1MtqGxevu+y1V+KbZe1udxwCfVPKw
> /sh0AbI9p6uXGtnPNnsVerM=
> =m6jL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
More information about the registrars
mailing list