Dear all, Steve: thanks so much as always for the excellent work and the useful and organized information you send to facilitate our analysis and interchange of ideas. My apologies to all: I will have to follow this issue through the transcripts as something urgent has just came up and I cannot participate today. Regards, G. Gabriela Szlak eInstituto Enviado desde mi BlackBerry de Movistar (http://www.movistar.com.ar) -----Original Message----- From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Sender: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:26:16 To: 'bc - GNSO list'<bc-gnso@icann.org> Subject: [bc-gnso] Outline for discussion of RAA comments today Here's an outline for today's member discussion of BC comments on the RAA. (11am eastern US time) Public Comment page is here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/proposed-raa-22apr13-en.htm>. The proposed final RAA is here<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-22apr13-...>. Initial comments due 13-May Outline: 1. Privacy/Proxy Specification (link<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-...>) There is no Service level specified for timing and methods to relay communications and reveal data to complainant. 2. Whois Maintain bulk access to Whois (port 43) "Willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable whois information" as basis to suspend a registration (3.7.7.2) If Registrant data isn't validated in 15 days, should registrations be suspended during manual validation? Should same accuracy requirement apply to Account Holder data as well? 3. Enforcement of Registrant Rights (link<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-...>), in particular: "You shall not be subject to false advertising or deceptive practices by your Registrar or though any proxy or privacy services made available by your Registrar. This includes deceptive notices, hidden fees, and any practices that are illegal under the consumer protection law of your residence." Do we need additional clarity in order to enforce Registrar obligations? Proposed RAA says: RAA 3.7.10 Registrar shall publish on its website(s) and/or provide a link to the Registrants’ Rights and Responsibilities Specification attached hereto and shall not take any action inconsistent with the corresponding provisions of this Agreement or applicable law. Note: during the Beijing meeting, ICANN attorney Samantha Eisner told the BC that Public comment would be particularly valuable in these areas: Registrant rights & responsibilities. This was drafted by registrars. Validation of registrant data (registrant and account holder?) Penalties for inaccurate data Registrars want to drop Port 43 access for thick registries Unilateral amendment by ICANN. -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482

Steve, Once again, great job in leading the discussion covering the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). Two additional overarching points I think we should also consider adding to our RAA comments are as follows: 1) With so many new registrar obligations, we are hopeful that ICANN Compliance is properly staffed to enforce the new agreement. 2) We would encourage ICANN to proactively educate all registrars of the new requirements, so that they all understand the new obligations and can comply with the new agreement. Thanks again. Best, Elisa Elisa Cooper Director of Product Marketing MarkMonitor Elisa Cooper Chair ICANN Business Constituency 208 389-5779 PH From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve DelBianco Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 8:26 AM To: 'bc - GNSO list' Subject: [bc-gnso] Outline for discussion of RAA comments today Here's an outline for today's member discussion of BC comments on the RAA. (11am eastern US time) Public Comment page is here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/proposed-raa-22apr13-en.htm>. The proposed final RAA is here<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-agreement-22apr13-...>. Initial comments due 13-May Outline: 1. Privacy/Proxy Specification (link<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-...>) There is no Service level specified for timing and methods to relay communications and reveal data to complainant. 2. Whois Maintain bulk access to Whois (port 43) "Willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable whois information" as basis to suspend a registration (3.7.7.2) If Registrant data isn't validated in 15 days, should registrations be suspended during manual validation? Should same accuracy requirement apply to Account Holder data as well? 3. Enforcement of Registrant Rights (link<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-...>), in particular: "You shall not be subject to false advertising or deceptive practices by your Registrar or though any proxy or privacy services made available by your Registrar. This includes deceptive notices, hidden fees, and any practices that are illegal under the consumer protection law of your residence." Do we need additional clarity in order to enforce Registrar obligations? Proposed RAA says: RAA 3.7.10 Registrar shall publish on its website(s) and/or provide a link to the Registrants' Rights and Responsibilities Specification attached hereto and shall not take any action inconsistent with the corresponding provisions of this Agreement or applicable law. Note: during the Beijing meeting, ICANN attorney Samantha Eisner told the BC that Public comment would be particularly valuable in these areas: Registrant rights & responsibilities. This was drafted by registrars. Validation of registrant data (registrant and account holder?) Penalties for inaccurate data Registrars want to drop Port 43 access for thick registries Unilateral amendment by ICANN. -- Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org +1.202.420.7482