[registrars] FYI re: Transfers

[Ross Rader]

Richard Lau wrote:
> Ross Rader wrote:
> "Inappropriate is ripping off registrants to line your own pocket."
> 
> Isn't the "internal transfer fulfilment" (or whatever one wants to call it)
> just that? The ICANN policy (as JB just pointed out) was quite clear in its
> intention that if a domain isn't renewed by a registrant, then the domain is
> to be deleted. 

Not unless the Registrant intended to keep the name. In which case, they 
should be allowed to do so. Net of this, its not  unreasonable for a 
change of registrant to take place if the prior registrant had 
originally intended simply not to renew. ICANN's policy is simply 
indicating that if the renewal doesn't happen, the domain should be 
deleted. In this case, the renewal does take place pursuant to a change 
of registrant.

> The RGP period has also been contracted around. Many registrars have their
> registrants agree that the domain can be transferred immediately upon
> expiration with no "emulated" RGP (while others actually offer a longer fake
> RGP of more than 30 days).

RGP isn't a policy,  its a registry service. Registrars are under no 
obligation to extend the registries RGP to their clients. Many 
registrars have instead implemented their own and as you point out, some 
have done nothing. I don't think its reasonable at any level for a 
post-expiry change of registrant to take place unless the original 
registrant has some means by which to reverse the process and reclaim 
their registration. Mistakes happen, names expire by accident. 
Registrants shouldn't be unduly penalized when this happens.

-- 
Regards,

Ross Rader
Director, Retail Services
Tucows Inc.

http://www.domaindirect.com
t. 416.538.5492