Kind Regards, Benedetta Rossi BC Secretariat https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home www.bizconst.org bc-secretariat@icann.org
Comment / Reply Periods (*)
Comment Open Date:
15 March 2013
Comment Close Date:
26 April 2013 - 23:59 UTC
Reply Open Date:
27 April 2013
Reply Close Date:
17 May 2013 - 23:59 UTC
Important Information Links
To Submit Your Comments (Forum)
Brief Overview
Originating Organization:
GNSO
Categories/Tags:
Purpose
(Brief):
The Generic Names Supporting Organization
Working Group tasked with addressing the issue of locking of
a domain name subject to Uniform Domain Name Dispute
Resolution Policy (UDRP) Proceedings has published its
Initial Report for public comment.
Current Status:
The Policy Development Process (PDP) Working
Group has published its Initial Report and is soliciting
community input on the preliminary recommendations contained
in the report.
Next Steps:
Following review of the public comments
received, the Working Group will continue its deliberations
and finalize its report for submission to the GNSO Council.
Staff Contact:
Marika Konings
Detailed Information
Section I: Description, Explanation, and
Purpose:
In its Initial Report [PDF, 883 KB], the PDP Working Group presents
eleven preliminary recommendations, which are expected to
usefully clarify and standardize how a domain name is locked
and unlocked during the course of a UDRP Proceeding for all
parties involved. Amongst
others, these recommendations include:
In addition to these recommendations, the WG
has put forward two possible options in its report to
clarify the process in case a settlement is reached and is
requesting community input on these two options or possible
alternatives.
It is important to emphasize that most of these
preliminary recommendations codify existing practices in
line with the UDRP and are not expected to require any
changes to the existing policy. However, should these
recommendations be adopted in their current form, minor
changes may need to be made to the UDRP rules and/or UDRP
Provider supplemental rules.
Those interested in providing input are
strongly encouraged to especially review section 5 and 6 of
the Initial Report in order to obtain a further
understanding concerning the WG's thinking and rationale
with regards to these recommendations as well as further
details with respect to the preliminary recommendations. In
addition to input on the preliminary recommendations, the WG
is also interested to receive further feedback on the
expected impact should these recommendations be adopted.
The WG would like to encourage all interested
parties to submit their comments and suggestions so these
can be considered as the WG continues its deliberations in
view of finalizing its report and recommendations in the
next phase of the policy development process.
1 The WG is considering adding the bracketed
language and would welcome community input on the proposed
addition.
2 Cyberflight in this context means changing the
registrant information with the intent to escape from the
dispute.
Section II: Background:
The "locking" of a domain name registration
associated with UDRP proceedings is not something that is
literally required by the UDRP as written, but is a practice
that has developed around it. As a result, there is no
uniform approach, which has resulted in confusion and
misunderstandings. To address this issue, the GNSO Council
decided to initiate a Policy Development Process on 15
December 2011. As part of its deliberations, the WG was
required to consider the following questions:
1. Whether the creation of an outline of a
proposed procedure, which a complainant must follow in order
for a registrar to place a domain name on registrar lock,
would be desirable.
2. Whether the creation of an outline of the
steps of the process that a registrar can reasonably expect
to take place during a UDRP dispute would be desirable.
3. Whether the time frame by which a registrar
must lock a domain after a UDRP has been filed should be
standardized.
4a. Whether what constitutes a "locked" domain
name should be defined.
4b. Whether, once a domain name is 'locked'
pursuant to a UDRP proceeding, the registrant information
for that domain name may be changed or modified.
5. Whether additional safeguards should be
created for the protection of registrants in cases where the
domain name is locked subject to a UDRP proceeding.
Section
III: Document and Resource Links:
Section
IV: Additional Information:
N/A
(*) Comments submitted after the posted Close
Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final
summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes
place once this period lapses.
Glen
de Saint Géry
GNSO
Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org