Evan, Evan Leibovitch wrote, On 8/2
This, of course, assumes that consumers are capable of making an informed decision. It is easy to compare "features", but impossible for consumers to shop based on ethics, compliance, or the likelihood that something 'unexpected' will happen. Hence my suggestion to setup a bench mark to compare registrars. However, I think the ALAC has no standing in doing that, if only because domain name registration is often a small part of the service provided. Depending on the registrar, this could include DNS, web or e-mail hosting. And personnally, I would be very worried if an internal committee of ICANN would start ranking registrars. If all you want to do is churn policy, go join the GNSO. ALAC's mandate deliberately extends to *everything* about ICANN. Limiting ALAC to policy matters is an unacceptable abdication of responsibility. Indeed, GNSO is only for gTLD policy. There is much more to ICANN than just the gTLDs. The ALAC is however an advisory commitee to the ICANN board, not a consumer union. I am fine if the ALAC tells the board that consumers are unhappy. But the ALAC is not in a position to, say, launch a class action suit against a registrar. And... by the way... I take offense to the characterization of "dumb customers". Such arrogant elitism has no place within an organization charged with representing the world of Internet end-users. I am sorry I have offended you. I think it is not elitism to expect a consumer buying a service to read the contract and its related documents. If the consumer finds the other party violates part of the contract, he can of course sue them. Now of course there is an economic question; "should I start a legal action for a $10/year domain name ?" It might be more pragmatic to go to a competitor instead.
This being said, the gentleman hit by the GoDaddy policies is a professional domain name speculator, not just your average blog owner. Professionals are supposed to know what they are doing. The GoDaddy policy is very vague about the conditions that would allow it to object to a transfer. http://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/legal_agreements/show_doc.asp?se=%2B&pageid=Do... It does not mention the specific issue of changes to whois information less than 60 days preventing a transfer, but the vagueness of the text may cover it. The main point is, I think, the imprecision of the contractual terms of GoDaddy. How far this is an ICANN issue and thus an ALAC issue, I do not know. Patrick