Thanks Craig.
I am curious to know from
contract parties whether the fraud issue is really a significant issue needed
Council consideration. Otherwise, I think this issue can be closed and no
further reports are needed to the Council since the stats are reported in the
monthly registry reports anyway.
From:
owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf
Of Craig Schwartz
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 6:38 AM
To: GNSO Council
Subject: [council] AGP Limits Policy - Status Report Inquiry
Dear Councilors,
The AGP Limits Policy contains a
provision that requires ICANN staff to provide semi-annual updates to the GSNO
on the implementation of the Policy. To date ICANN has issued two reports, the
first in June 2009 and the second in December 2009. With excessive AGP deletes
down by 99.7%, the Policy is achieving its desired outcome and this was stated
in the last report.
Also noted in the last report were
some registrar complaints about exemptions requests that had been denied when
the basis for the request was fraud. From the 14 December 2009 report, ICANN
noted: A question the GNSO Council may wish to consider in the future is
whether modifications to the Policy are necessary and/or appropriate given the
results and community reaction to date. For example, should the GNSO Council
consider defining the terms “extraordinary circumstances” or “reoccur
regularly?” During the policy development process on domain tasting some
community members suggested that the mitigation of instances of consumer fraud
may be a legitimate use of AGP deletes. Additionally, if a registrar proactively
takes down (i.e., deletes) domains that are known to propagate a fraudulent
activity such as phishing, should the registrar bear the cost if the deletions
cause the registrar to exceed the threshold defined in the Policy?
Staff recommends that the GSNO
consider whether further work is needed in light of the fact that excessive AGP
deletes are down by 99.7%. Staff further recommends that the Council
consider whether semi-annual reports should be continued and if so, with what
frequency?
I’m happy
to join the next GNSO call to discuss this and to answer any questions you may
have.
Best,
Craig
Schwartz
Chief gTLD Registry Liaison
ICANN