Dear all, Just to flag that I have gone in and proposed some updated language to the current accuracy description. For completeness, I have also set out some background information below. Background Whilst there are no explicit provisions in the Base Registry Agreement that refer to the accuracy of registrant data, the following sections and specifications of the Base RA have a nexus to the topic of registration data accuracy. Specification 11 Certain gTLDs are subject to Category 1 and 2 Safeguards<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-2-05f...>, which are contained in Specification 11 of the Registry Agreement. Safeguards 5-8 may have some relevance to registration data accuracy. Safeguard 5 requires that the registrant’s administrative contact information and the contact details of the relevant regulatory, or industry self-regulatory bodies in their main place of business, is up to date. Safeguards 6-8 require an up-to-date representation that the Registrant possesses any necessary authorisations, charters, licenses and/or other related credentials for participation in the sector associated with the relevant string. Some ROs also include voluntary PICs under Specification 11 that are individual to either the RO, the gTLD or both. These PICs may contain additional validation, verification, or accuracy obligations. Since these are voluntarily adopted, it does not seem appropriate for the Accuracy Scoping Team to review these individual PICs. Community gTLDs Section 2.19 of the Base Registry Agreement (which applies to Community gTLDs only), requires Community gTLD operators to establish naming conventions and requirements for registration by members of the TLD community. Community gTLD operators are also required to comply with the community registration policies set forth in Specification 12, establish procedures for the enforcement of registration policies, the resolution of disputes under registration policies and enforce such policies. Community gTLD operators are further bound by the Registry Restrictions Dispute Resolution Procedure<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registries/rrdrp>. Depending on the language contained in each Specification 12, to conform with the application submitted for the TLD, many Community ROs have an obligation to undertake verification or validation of registrants. Community gTLDs are intended to serve specific communities and the provisions contained in each Specification 12 are therefore unique to each community gTLD. As above, it does not seem appropriate to review these individual terms. dotBrands/Specification 13 Specification 13<https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/agreements/agreement-approved...> restricts the registrants of the TLD to the Registry Operator, its Affiliates or Trademark Licensees. Control of the DNS records associated with domain names at any level in the TLD is likewise restricted to these parties. Each dotBrand must conduct an internal audit at least every 12 months, and provide the results of this review to ICANN, to assess whether the dotBrand is operating within the scope of Specification 13. Thanks, Sophie Sophie Hey Policy Advisor Com Laude T +44 (0) 20 7421 8250 Ext 252 [cid:image001.png@01D83E9C.DB203150]<https://comlaude.com/> From: GNSO-Accuracy-ST <gnso-accuracy-st-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: 22 March 2022 13:29 To: gnso-accuracy-st@icann.org Subject: [GNSO-Accuracy-ST] Proposed Agenda - Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team meeting #22 on Thursday 24 March at 14.00 UTC Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 24 March at 14.00 UTC. As a reminder: 1. RDA Scoping Team members to suggest further edits to the current accuracy description, based on the discussion from Thursday’s meeting, including, for example, updated language regarding Spec. 13: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e5rUm-AFFDgNOU3OcT7ABu4InGwPiUyb/edit by Wednesday, 23 March. 2. Still open: In advance of the next meeting on Thursday, 24 March, RDA Scoping Team Members to review the Gap Analysis Proposal Review. Note: this document was compiled by Support Staff in an effort to distill the proposals made by Scoping Team Members, including upsides and downsides noted by either the proposer or other team members in subsequent discussions. The document is not meant to restrict the group into choosing one proposal, but rather, the group should review all proposals and see which proposals provide a viable path to forward progress. Note: IPC Reps: please respond to the comments directed to you in Proposal H. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sScP8MwgDCg4yvFNAYwQVql7DQob60vX/edit) Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team – Meeting #22 Thursday 24 March at 14.00 UTC 1. Welcome & Chair Updates (5 minutes) 1. Accuracy working definition / construct (30 minutes) * Consider input received on proposed description of current accuracy requirements and enforcement (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e5rUm-AFFDgNOU3OcT7ABu4InGwPiUyb/edit) * Review survey responses – see https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdL-R4Tk7pP86bMIRMX1tH1IA9-UgbHFYVJ... * Confirm next steps 3. Continue review of Gap Analysis Data Collection Proposals (30 minutes) (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sScP8MwgDCg4yvFNAYwQVql7DQob60vX/edit) a. Review Scoping Team input on proposals (upside, downside and possible next steps) b. Confirm next steps 1. Confirm action items & next meeting (Thursday 31 March at 14.00 UTC) ________________________________ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that Com Laude Group Limited (the “Com Laude Group”) does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group is a limited company registered in England and Wales with company number 10689074 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 6181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176 and registered office at 15 William Street, South West Lane, Edinburgh, EH3 7LL Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, a corporation incorporated in the State of Washington and principal office address at Suite 332, Securities Building, 1904 Third Ave, Seattle, WA 98101; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan with company number 0100-01-190853 and registered office at 1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan; Com Laude Domain ESP S.L.U., a company registered in Spain and registered office address at Calle Barcas 2, 2, Valencia, 46002, Spain. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com>
