[Rt4-whois] A word on proxies

[Susan Kawaguchi]

Hi James,
From the recommendations document of November 21st
Ø  For the avoidance of doubt, the WHOIS Policy should include an affirmative statement that clarifies that a proxy means a relationship in which the registrant is acting on behalf of another.  The WHOIS data is that of the agent and the agent alone obtains all rights and assumes all responsibility for the domain name and its manner of use.

Ø  Remove proxy services from the RAA since the proxy, as an agent, is the registrant. Expand and ? affirmative sentence


We agreed to request that ICANN remove the language from 3.7.7.3 concerning proxy registrations and acknowledge that the registered name holder accept all liability for the domain name.

Hope this helps.

Susan

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:32 PM
To: Emily Taylor
Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] A word on proxies

Emily and Team:

Forgive me, but can someone please state what is "the position we agreed in Dakar" ?

I wasn't in attendance, and frankly with all of the drafts circulating on this issue, I think I've lost the original starting point.

Thanks--

J.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Rt4-whois] A word on proxies
From: Emily Taylor <emily at emilytaylor.eu<mailto:emily at emilytaylor.eu>>
Date: Sun, November 27, 2011 1:52 am
To: rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>

Hi all

I've been following the exchanges with interest.

On proxies, our default position should be what we agreed in Dakar.  We all (including Susan) agreed those recommendations, despite virtually everyone having reservations on some of the issues.  James and Susan (and latterly Kathy) were tasked to see whether they could agree additional text on proxies, and agreement wasn't possible.  To me, this indicates that we have pushed the consensus as far as it can go at this stage.

I think that we could add a paragraph in our findings to say that we wrestled with the issue of proxies, and set out a summary of both positions (ie concern that it will just be continuation of what we have; vs concern about bringing in an regulating non-contracted parties).  We should definitely label this as one to watch, and an area where the community should build up good practices voluntarily.  We welcome the study/work/whatever on reveal and relay, and anticipate that it will highlight many of the issues that we have encountered about patchy standards amongst commercial proxy providers: from gold standard (eg Domains by Proxy, [ others?  Moniker?]) to others such as Above.com<http://Above.com> (an ICANN accredited registrar) which does not reveal until after UDRP or other proceedings have started, and has been found against in over 100 UDRP cases.  It is an area where improved standards are necessary to promote consumer trust, and we look to the industry initially to work on these.  The next WHOIS Review will have more information (ie the outcome of many of the studies which are just started now), and will be able to evaluate how well the industry has done.

Susan - I appreciate, and share many of your concerns.  However, we committed to a hard-won consensus on this issue in Dakar.  You have rightly explored whether it's possible to do more, and it isn't at this stage. You can see from the responses of others in the group (eg Seth, Peter) that the preservation of our consensus is the most important thing at this stage of our study.  I hope you will recognise how much we have achieved in this regard.  Reading the draft report as a whole, I feel very proud of all of our work, and our teamwork.

Kind regards

Emily



--


   [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/etclogo250x60.gif]


76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK
t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (0)7540 049 322
emily at emilytaylor.eu<mailto:emily at emilytaylor.eu>

www.etlaw.co.uk<http://www.etlaw.co.uk>

Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713.

________________________________
_______________________________________________
Rt4-whois mailing list
Rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:Rt4-whois at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20111128/c4dfc9e6/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Current WRT Recommendations - v1 - Nov 21.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 61440 bytes
Desc: Current WRT Recommendations - v1 - Nov 21.doc
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20111128/c4dfc9e6/CurrentWRTRecommendations-v1-Nov21.doc