- ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8
by Alan Greenberg March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

Sorry, forgot one thing. At 27/03/2013 01:01 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >At 27/03/2013 12:20 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >>On 27 March 2013 11:47, Garth Bruen at KnujOn >><<mailto:gbruen@knujon.com>gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: >> >>Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from: >>âUpon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision >>of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS informationâ >>To: >>âUpon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful >>provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS informationâ >> >> >> >>Agreed, though I think that "report" is >>sufficient. A discovery that is unreported can't be of much help. > >See my e-mail just sent which explains why I >think that "report" is overly broad. Don't agree about omitting discovery. That covers the case where a registrar "discovers" the problem, likely due to one of the required checks mandated in the earlier sections of the specification. It does not make sense for a registrar to have to report the problem to itself, yet the predicate part of this sentence is what allows the registrar to disable the domain with impunity. Alan >> >>AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: >>"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in >>the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by >>Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. >>In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information >>associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable >>steps to correct that inaccuracy." >>To: >>"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in >>the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by >>Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. >>In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information >>associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable >>steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE >>DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION." >> >> >>I'm OK with the intent, but would suggest >>something more explicit, that allows for a period of time to make corrections. >> >> >>"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any >>person of an inaccuracy in the contact >>information associated with a Registered Name >>sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps >>to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the >>event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact >>information associated with a Registered Name >>it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to >>correct that inaccuracy. Domains that maintain >>inaccurate information, after given reasonable >>time to be corrected upon notification, shall >>be cancelled or suspended by the Registrar in >>accordance with the accuracy specification. >> >>Is this any more palatable? > >Whois Accuracy Specification explicitly gives a >15 day window after which te registrar must disable the domain. > >Alan > > >>- Evan

3 4

Final Draft ALAC Rules of Procedure - For Approval
by Alan Greenberg March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

Attached please find the final version of the RoP for approval by the ALAC. The changes since the last version distributed (v71) are: - The four changes agreed to during our ALAC teleconference yesterday. - A change to 3.6 to synchronize it with the change we made to section 6 on ALT responsibilities. 3.6 now points to 6.1-6.3 so there is no confusion between the two sections describing the ALT. - Added missing periods and eliminated a few extra spaces where there were two between words. The proposed motion for approval is below. Alan ================ Whereas the current ALAC Rules of Procedure dates back to 2007, at the very start of the formation of the current RALO-based At-Large Community; Whereas experiences of the ensuing six years had shown that an overall review was required; Whereas a project to review and re-write the Rules of Procedure has been underway since April 2012, and that this project has involved extensive study, discussion and drafting by ALAC members and others from all ICANN regions; Resolved that the Draft ALAC Rules of Procedure dated 27 March 2013 (insert URL here) be adopted to replace the current ALAC Rules of Procedure (Document number AL/2007/1/1.Rev 11). The new Rules will take effect as soon as Adjunct Documents RoP-Adjunct-01, RoP-Adjunct-03 and RoP-Adjunct-04 referenced by the proposed Rules of Procedure have been approved by the ALAC.

1 0

Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8
by Alan Greenberg March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

At 27/03/2013 12:20 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >On 27 March 2013 11:47, Garth Bruen at KnujOn ><<mailto:gbruen@knujon.com>gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: > >Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from: > >âUpon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision >of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS informationâ > >To: > >âUpon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful >provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS informationâ > > > >Agreed, though I think that "report" is >sufficient. A discovery that is unreported can't be of much help. See my e-mail just sent which explains why I think that "report" is overly broad. > >AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: > >"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in >the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by >Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. >In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information >associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable >steps to correct that inaccuracy." > >To: > >"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in >the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by >Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. >In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information >associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable >steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE >DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION." > > >I'm OK with the intent, but would suggest >something more explicit, that allows for a period of time to make corrections. > > >"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any >person of an inaccuracy in the contact >information associated with a Registered Name >sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to >investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the >event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact >information associated with a Registered Name it >sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to >correct that inaccuracy. Domains that maintain >inaccurate information, after given reasonable >time to be corrected upon notification, shall be >cancelled or suspended by the Registrar in >accordance with the accuracy specification. > >Is this any more palatable? Whois Accuracy Specification explicitly gives a 15 day window after which te registrar must disable the domain. Alan >- Evan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8
by Alan Greenberg March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

At 27/03/2013 11:47 AM, Garth Bruen at KnujOn wrote: >Thanks Alan. In terms of "words that in your mind would make the needed >link, please propose them.", yes I will submit. > >The important piece is connecting reports from the public to obligations >of compliance in an clear and explicit way, this what is missing. > >My recommendations are to > >Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from: > >Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision >of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information > >To: > >Upon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful >provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information Although when I first saw this mentioned in Holly's wiki post, I liked it, but on reflection it does not quite work. I can report that Knujon is obviously a made up name and is a willful attempt to mask your true identity. Or that "Garth" is clearly a fabrication. If the registrar knows that these are both legitimate, should you still be required to provide documentation of their validity to the registrar within 15 days or loose your domains? I still like the idea, but that language cannot work. Would you accept "Upon a validated report or discovert..."? >AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: > >"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in >the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by >Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. >In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information >associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable >steps to correct that inaccuracy." > >To: > >"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in >the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by >Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. >In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information >associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable >steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE >DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION." Why is this needed when 3.7.8 starts with "Registrar shall comply with the obligations specified in the Whois Accuracy Program Specification"? Alan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

Thanks Evan, I'm good with the addition as long as the public report is directly tied to a contractual obligation > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8 > From: Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> > Date: Wed, March 27, 2013 12:20 pm > To: Garth Bruen at KnujOn <gbruen(a)knujon.com> > Cc: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca>, ALAC Working List > <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > > On 27 March 2013 11:47, Garth Bruen at KnujOn <gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: > > Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from: > > > > “Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision > > of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…” > > > > To: > > > > “Upon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful > > provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…” > > > > > Agreed, though I think that "report" is sufficient. A discovery that is > unreported can't be of much help. > > > > > AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: > > > > "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in > > the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by > > Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. > > In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information > > associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable > > steps to correct that inaccuracy." > > > > To: > > > > "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in > > the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by > > Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. > > In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information > > associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable > > steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE > > DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION." > > > > I'm OK with the intent, but would suggest something more explicit, that > allows for a period of time to make corrections. > > > "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy > in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored > by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed > inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact > information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take > reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy. Domains that maintain > inaccurate information, after given reasonable time to be corrected upon > notification, shall be cancelled or suspended by the Registrar in > accordance with the accuracy specification. > > Is this any more palatable? > > - Evan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

Thanks Alan. In terms of "words that in your mind would make the needed link, please propose them.", yes I will submit. The important piece is connecting reports from the public to obligations of compliance in an clear and explicit way, this what is missing. My recommendations are to Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from: “Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…” To: “Upon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…” AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." To: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION." ------------------------------------- Garth Bruen gbruen(a)knujon.com 617-947-3805 http://www.knujon.com http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Linkedin Group: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1870205 Blog: http://www.circleid.com/members/3296/ Twitter: @Knujon Shop: http://www.cafepress.com/knujon Bookstore: http://astore.amazon.com/knujocom-20 > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8 > From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> > Date: Tue, March 26, 2013 10:35 pm > To: Garth Bruen <gbruen(a)knujon.com>, 'ALAC Working List' > <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > > See my comments below. Alan > > At 22/03/2013 04:59 PM, Garth Bruen wrote: > >Alan, > > > >Thanks for the question. > > > >My first concern is that the contract and the specifications are not the > >same thing, I would argue it is worth putting this within the contract to > >make it clear if it is worth putting in at all. > > The Whois specification is explicitly invoked in 3.7.8 is for all > intents and purposes an integral part of the RAA. They are using the > Specifications in much the same way that the draft ALAC Rules of > Procedure use Adjunct Documents to take a lt of the details out of > the mainstream set of rules. > > >My second concern is a logical disconnect between the language of the > >specification and the language of the second clause of 3.7.8. Let me > >explain. > > > >The major problem with 3.7.8 is in this wording: "Registrar shall, upon > >notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information > >associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable > >steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns > >of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it > >sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." > > > >This allows non-contracted parties to the RAA to file complaints about false > >registrations but it does NOT contain any enforcement measures. It does not > >compel the registrar to do anything, does not define "reasonableness", and > >therefore gives ICANN no method for addressing it. > > I grant that "reasonable" is not defined, but this is absolutely > standard contract language (clauses such as "this contract may not be > transfered with the explicit permission of party A, such permission > shall not unreasonably be withheld"). Yes, it is at times not honours > properly and at times goes to court or arbitration, but these are > terms that are very difficult to define fully, and when you try, the > definition often comes back to bite you. That being said, if you do > have a definition that you think would work, by all means propose it. > > > >The specification #5 states: "Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name > >Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information, > >its willful failure promptly to update information provided to Registrar, or > >its failure to respond for over fifteen (15) calendar days to inquiries by > >Registrar > >concerning the accuracy of contact details associated with the Registered > >Name Holder's registration " > > > >There is no specific or implied connection between inaccuracies reported by > >the public and "the occurrence of a ... provision of inaccurate or > >unreliable WHOIS information." The assumption that "notification by any > >person" translates to an "occurrence" is just an assumption. How a report > >from the public becomes an issue requiring process is not defined. > > Again, if you have some words that in your mind would make the needed > link, please propose them. > > > >Furthermore there is muddling of the obligations of the registrant versus > >the obligation of the registrar. 3.7.8 ONLY refers to obligations by the > >registrar, with the second clause ONLY referring to registrar obligations in > >response to public reports. The specification document refers to registrar > >verification and validation. Only specification #4 provides for ANY eternal > >inaccuracy report data and this ONLY refers to contact email addresses, no > >other data elements such as phone numbers, mailing addresses or entity > >names. > > > >The overarching point is that 3.7.8 is one of the few (if only) contract > >sections which opens the door to community oversight or grievance but it is > >artfully hobbled. This new specification as written does NOT fix the > >problem. It still completely leaves domain cancelation at the discretion of > >the registrar, still leaves the definitions of "inaccuracy" and > >"reasonableness" up to the registrar. > > > >We are dealing in an area of vast gray paint which needs to be clear for all > >to see. > > > >-Garth > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >[mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg > >Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 2:57 PM > >To: ALAC Working List > >Subject: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8 > >Importance: High > > > >Garth, on the recent teleconference on the RAA you raised the issue of RAA > >3.7.8 and said the problem of its being unenforceable by ICANN was still not > >resolved. > > > >As I read it, 3.7.8 (and associated specifications) now says: > > > >- verification of contact information at time of registration required > >- periodic re-verification > >- upon notification of inaccuracy > >- if inaccurate information is found and not corrected within 15 days, > >registrar must terminate or suspend registration, or place it on clientHold. > > > >If the registrar does not do this, they have violated the terms of the RAA. > > > >What more is it that you are looking for? > > > >Alan > > > >_______________________________________________ > >ALAC mailing list > >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > > > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: > >https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA > >C)

2 1

Re: [ALAC] [Registrants-rights] Fwd: OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT: Proposed 2013 RAA Posted for Comment
by Alan Greenberg March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

Holly, I do not see a "link below" so do not know exactly what you are referring to. The gist of the statement that I am thinking of is pretty much what you imply and as I implied today: - We are very happy with the overall changes, this is a MUCH better contract from the point of view of ICANN and registrants. - Although we would prefer to have an RAA which both ICANN and registrars have fully endorsed, we support ICANN's implied position that it has the right to put a new RAA in place even if registrars have not agreed to all provision. - We have some concern with the unilateral right to amend, but at the same time appreciate that ICANN needs some way to implement changes quicker that though the regular amendment process and then waiting up to five years for the new provision to take effect. - ICANN has been silent on exactly how the RAA will be put into effect, and in the 2008/9 version, it was deemed necessary for the GNSO to ratify the new RAA before the Board could approve it. The ALAC is taking this silence to mean that GNSO ratification will not be required this time, a position that ALAC supports. - ... The ... needs to include: - things that we feel need to be changed in the agreed to language. - places where there is not closure but we strongly support ICANN's provision - places where there is not closure but we strongly support the registrar's provision - preferably for all places whete there is still a difference, we should come down on one side or another. This is one of the main reasons this RAA is out for comment now. It is in these last areas that we QUICKLY need very specific input. Alan At 26/03/2013 06:25 PM, Holly Raiche wrote: >Folks > >There is not a lot of time for this. But please have a look (link >below) - from whatever perspective. > >There are many positives in what has been negotiated in the RAA >itself and in the accompanying documents. There are still some >outstanding issues as well. There was an all-too-brief look at the >issues in the ALAC call today - noting that Whois issues are part of the mix. > >Some of today's discussion did mention that the discussion of issues >are overlapping - and this is a classic case. But we still must >develop comments on the RAA - particularly on those issues that are >still the subject of negotiation, but also to say we are happy with >the changes (in most cases we are but maybe not for everything?). > >It you don't have time to go through all the documents, concentrate >on one or two and provide feedback. Alan holds the pen for this - >and it's too big a task for him to do without all of your help. > >Holly

1 0

RAA 3.7.8
by Alan Greenberg March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

Garth, on the recent teleconference on the RAA you raised the issue of RAA 3.7.8 and said the problem of its being unenforceable by ICANN was still not resolved. As I read it, 3.7.8 (and associated specifications) now says: - verification of contact information at time of registration required - periodic re-verification - upon notification of inaccuracy - if inaccurate information is found and not corrected within 15 days, registrar must terminate or suspend registration, or place it on clientHold. If the registrar does not do this, they have violated the terms of the RAA. What more is it that you are looking for? Alan

2 4

Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8
by Garth Bruen March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

Alan, Thanks for the question. My first concern is that the contract and the specifications are not the same thing, I would argue it is worth putting this within the contract to make it clear if it is worth putting in at all. My second concern is a logical disconnect between the language of the specification and the language of the second clause of 3.7.8. Let me explain. The major problem with 3.7.8 is in this wording: "Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." This allows non-contracted parties to the RAA to file complaints about false registrations but it does NOT contain any enforcement measures. It does not compel the registrar to do anything, does not define "reasonableness", and therefore gives ICANN no method for addressing it. The specification #5 states: "Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information, its willful failure promptly to update information provided to Registrar, or its failure to respond for over fifteen (15) calendar days to inquiries by Registrar concerning the accuracy of contact details associated with the Registered Name Holder's registration " There is no specific or implied connection between inaccuracies reported by the public and "the occurrence of a ... provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information." The assumption that "notification by any person" translates to an "occurrence" is just an assumption. How a report from the public becomes an issue requiring process is not defined. Furthermore there is muddling of the obligations of the registrant versus the obligation of the registrar. 3.7.8 ONLY refers to obligations by the registrar, with the second clause ONLY referring to registrar obligations in response to public reports. The specification document refers to registrar verification and validation. Only specification #4 provides for ANY eternal inaccuracy report data and this ONLY refers to contact email addresses, no other data elements such as phone numbers, mailing addresses or entity names. The overarching point is that 3.7.8 is one of the few (if only) contract sections which opens the door to community oversight or grievance but it is artfully hobbled. This new specification as written does NOT fix the problem. It still completely leaves domain cancelation at the discretion of the registrar, still leaves the definitions of "inaccuracy" and "reasonableness" up to the registrar. We are dealing in an area of vast gray paint which needs to be clear for all to see. -Garth -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 2:57 PM To: ALAC Working List Subject: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8 Importance: High Garth, on the recent teleconference on the RAA you raised the issue of RAA 3.7.8 and said the problem of its being unenforceable by ICANN was still not resolved. As I read it, 3.7.8 (and associated specifications) now says: - verification of contact information at time of registration required - periodic re-verification - upon notification of inaccuracy - if inaccurate information is found and not corrected within 15 days, registrar must terminate or suspend registration, or place it on clientHold. If the registrar does not do this, they have violated the terms of the RAA. What more is it that you are looking for? Alan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA C)

2 1

Outcome of new gTLDs, "Strawman" proposal
by Alan Greenberg March 27, 2013

March 27, 2013

ICANN has announced the outcome of the new gTPD trademark protection discussion. http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/trademark-clearinghouse/strawman-solutio… Although the outcomes were not exactly as the ALAC advised (in terms of what required policy development), all of the IP protections that ICANN will be moving ahead with were supported by the ALAC, and the one additional protection that the ALAC explicitly did not support will not be implemented. Also a vlog from the CEO - http://blog.icann.org/2013/03/new-gtld-milestones-and-deadlines/. Alan

3 3