Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC
Hi, Team. The next IRTP-D Implementation Review Team call will be held on Thursday, 27 August at 1900UTC. We will be discussing the attached draft of the Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy, which incorporates Recommendations 3, 4, and 10. If you are unable to attend the call but have comments on the attached draft, please feel free to submit comments to the list. Also, for those of you who were unable to attend our last call, please find recordings, notes and relevant documents on the IRTP-D workspace page here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53777540. Please find the dial-in information for the next week¹s call below: Link to Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/irtpd/ <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/irtpd/> *Upon logging into Adobe Connect, a pop up window will provide you the option to Dial Out to your Phone. Enter your Phone Number* (Remember to change the Country Code if needed). After joining the call, as a courtesy to others and the presenters, please MUTE your phone. This can be done by selecting *6 on your keypad. To UNMUTE select *6 again. If you are Unable to log into Adobe Connect and can only join via phone: List of International Dial In Numbers: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=6458688446&num=1-719-4 57-6209 Participant Passcode: 6458688446 Best regards, Caitlin Tubergen Registrar Relations and Contracts Manager ICANN
Sorry can't make today's call. Question though about the the language used in 3.3.2 In the event that the Filing Registrar does not prevail in a dispute, the Filing Fees shall be retained by the Dispute Resolution Provider. What is the reason behind this ? I was not part of the WG, so there could be a good reason, to have the language worded like this, however it might create the impression, that it is economical favorable for the dispute provider not to rule in favor for the filing Registrar as the dispute provider then gets to keep the money ? In the scenario where the filing Registrar wins, the losing Registrar has to send the filing fee to the filing Registrar and the dispute provider does not get to keep (retain) the filing fee. Thanks, Theo Van: "Caitlin Tubergen" <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Aan: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Verzonden: Donderdag 27 augustus 2015 01:13:31 Onderwerp: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Hi, Team. The next IRTP-D Implementation Review Team call will be held on Thursday, 27 August at 1900UTC . We will be discussing the attached draft of the Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy, which incorporates Recommendations 3, 4, and 10. If you are unable to attend the call but have comments on the attached draft, please feel free to submit comments to the list. Also, for those of you who were unable to attend our last call, please find recordings, notes and relevant documents on the IRTP-D workspace page here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53777540 . Please find the dial-in information for the next week’s call below: Link to Adobe Connect : https://icann.adobeconnect.com/irtpd/ *Upon logging into Adobe Connect, a pop up window will provide you the option to Dial Out to your Phone. Enter your Phone Number* (Remember to change the Country Code if needed). After joining the call, as a courtesy to others and the presenters, please MUTE your phone. This can be done by selecting *6 on your keypad. To UNMUTE select *6 again. If you are Unable to log into Adobe Connect and can only join via phone: List of International Dial In Numbers: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=6458688446&num=1-719-4... Participant Passcode: 6458688446 Best regards, Caitlin Tubergen Registrar Relations and Contracts Manager ICANN _______________________________________________ Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt mailing list Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-irtpd-rt
Hi Theo, I was under the impression that if the Filing Registrar did prevail, the non-filing registrar (the “Respondent”) would be required to send the Filing Fee to the Dispute Resolution Provider and then the Dispute Resolution Provider would return the Filing Fee to the Filing Registrar within 14 days. Section 3.3.3 addresses this. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com<mailto:bknight@Verisign.com> t: 703-948-3343 c: 703-622-1071 12061 Bluemont Way, Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://www.verisigninc.com/> [Description: Description: Description: Description: Verisign™] From: gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Theo Geurts Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:32 PM To: Caitlin Tubergen Cc: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Sorry can't make today's call. Question though about the the language used in 3.3.2 In the event that the Filing Registrar does not prevail in a dispute, the Filing Fees shall be retained by the Dispute Resolution Provider. What is the reason behind this ? I was not part of the WG, so there could be a good reason, to have the language worded like this, however it might create the impression, that it is economical favorable for the dispute provider not to rule in favor for the filing Registrar as the dispute provider then gets to keep the money ? In the scenario where the filing Registrar wins, the losing Registrar has to send the filing fee to the filing Registrar and the dispute provider does not get to keep (retain) the filing fee. Thanks, Theo ________________________________ Van: "Caitlin Tubergen" <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Aan: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org> Verzonden: Donderdag 27 augustus 2015 01:13:31 Onderwerp: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Hi, Team. The next IRTP-D Implementation Review Team call will be held on Thursday, 27 August at 1900UTC. We will be discussing the attached draft of the Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy, which incorporates Recommendations 3, 4, and 10. If you are unable to attend the call but have comments on the attached draft, please feel free to submit comments to the list. Also, for those of you who were unable to attend our last call, please find recordings, notes and relevant documents on the IRTP-D workspace page here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53777540. Please find the dial-in information for the next week’s call below: Link to Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/irtpd/ *Upon logging into Adobe Connect, a pop up window will provide you the option to Dial Out to your Phone. Enter your Phone Number* (Remember to change the Country Code if needed). After joining the call, as a courtesy to others and the presenters, please MUTE your phone. This can be done by selecting *6 on your keypad. To UNMUTE select *6 again. If you are Unable to log into Adobe Connect and can only join via phone: List of International Dial In Numbers: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=6458688446&num=1-719-4... Participant Passcode: 6458688446 ________________________________ Best regards, Caitlin Tubergen Registrar Relations and Contracts Manager ICANN _______________________________________________ Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt mailing list Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-irtpd-rt
Yes, Barbara is right. The intention, as I recall it, was to keep the TDRP the same as it is now. The Filing fee is paid to the Provider to administer the dispute. The Provider keeps that for their work, regardless of who wins or loses. The win/loss part only matters because that determines WHO pays the filing fees. I think the language might be inartful. Kristine Kristine F. Dorrain, Esq. Director of Arbitration Forum P.O. Box 50191 Minneapolis, MN 55405 Phone 952.516.6456 Fax 866.342.0657 Email kdorrain@adrforum.com www.adrforum.com This e-mail message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and attachments From: gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Knight, Barbara Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 2:38 PM To: Theo Geurts; Caitlin Tubergen Cc: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Hi Theo, I was under the impression that if the Filing Registrar did prevail, the non-filing registrar (the “Respondent”) would be required to send the Filing Fee to the Dispute Resolution Provider and then the Dispute Resolution Provider would return the Filing Fee to the Filing Registrar within 14 days. Section 3.3.3 addresses this. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com<mailto:bknight@Verisign.com> t: 703-948-3343 c: 703-622-1071 12061 Bluemont Way, Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com<http://www.verisigninc.com/> [Description: Description: Description: Description: Verisign™] From: gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Theo Geurts Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:32 PM To: Caitlin Tubergen Cc: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Sorry can't make today's call. Question though about the the language used in 3.3.2 In the event that the Filing Registrar does not prevail in a dispute, the Filing Fees shall be retained by the Dispute Resolution Provider. What is the reason behind this ? I was not part of the WG, so there could be a good reason, to have the language worded like this, however it might create the impression, that it is economical favorable for the dispute provider not to rule in favor for the filing Registrar as the dispute provider then gets to keep the money ? In the scenario where the filing Registrar wins, the losing Registrar has to send the filing fee to the filing Registrar and the dispute provider does not get to keep (retain) the filing fee. Thanks, Theo ________________________________ Van: "Caitlin Tubergen" <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org<mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> Aan: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org> Verzonden: Donderdag 27 augustus 2015 01:13:31 Onderwerp: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Hi, Team. The next IRTP-D Implementation Review Team call will be held on Thursday, 27 August at 1900UTC. We will be discussing the attached draft of the Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy, which incorporates Recommendations 3, 4, and 10. If you are unable to attend the call but have comments on the attached draft, please feel free to submit comments to the list. Also, for those of you who were unable to attend our last call, please find recordings, notes and relevant documents on the IRTP-D workspace page here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53777540. Please find the dial-in information for the next week’s call below: Link to Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/irtpd/ *Upon logging into Adobe Connect, a pop up window will provide you the option to Dial Out to your Phone. Enter your Phone Number* (Remember to change the Country Code if needed). After joining the call, as a courtesy to others and the presenters, please MUTE your phone. This can be done by selecting *6 on your keypad. To UNMUTE select *6 again. If you are Unable to log into Adobe Connect and can only join via phone: List of International Dial In Numbers: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=6458688446&num=1-719-4... Participant Passcode: 6458688446 ________________________________ Best regards, Caitlin Tubergen Registrar Relations and Contracts Manager ICANN _______________________________________________ Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt mailing list Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-irtpd-rt
The intention, as I recall it, was to keep the TDRP the same as it is now. The Filing fee is paid to the Provider to administer the dispute. The Provider keeps that for their work, regardless of who wins or loses. The win/loss part only matters because that determines WHO pays the filing fees. I think the language might be inartful.
The explanation is even more confusing ;)
The Filing fee is paid to the Provider to administer the dispute.
The Filing Fee is paid to the Provider administer the dispute *by whomever brings the dispute action*
The Provider keeps that for their work, regardless of who wins or loses.
The Provider retains the Filing Fee as payment for their services.
The win/loss part only matters because that determines WHO pays the filing fees.
But the Filing Fee has already been paid ... It should be more like: * The Filing Fee is paid to the Provider to administer the dispute by the Claimant * The Provider holds the Filing Fee in trust until settlement after the Outcome * The Outcome Fee is limited to a maximum amount of the Filing Fee * If the Claimant Wins, Outcome Fee is to be paid by the Defendant within X days * If the Defendant Wins, Outcome Fee is to be paid from the Filing Fee, with any remainder being returned with X days OR we get into "if you win you can claim your costs from the loser" and the whole they-don’t-pay game ... Rob Have you heard the joke about Inter Registry Transfers yet ? I would tell you, but it takes 5 days ! /boom-tish/ --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
Sorry I didn't reply all: My point is that the current rule is pretty unambiguous and has never been the subject of controversy to date and I can't see any reason why we'd want to muck up the language to solve an ambiguity problem that doesn't exist. Current Rule: 4.4 Fees for Second-Level Dispute Resolution Service 4.4.1 In the case of either a Request for Enforcement or an Appeal filed at the Second Level, the applicable Dispute Resolution Provider shall determine the applicable filing fee ("Filing Fee"). The specific fees along with the terms and conditions governing the actual payment of such fees shall be included in the Dispute Resolution Provider’s Supplemental Rules. 4.4.2 In the event that the Filing Registrar or Appellant, whichever applicable, does not prevail in a Second-Level dispute, the Filing Fees shall be retained by the Dispute Resolution Provider. 4.4.3 In the event that the Filing Registrar or Appellant, whichever applicable, prevails in a Second-Level dispute, the Respondent or Appellee, whichever applicable, must submit to the Dispute Resolution Provider, the Filing Fees within fourteen (14) calendar days after such decision. In such an event, the Dispute Resolution Provider shall refund to the Filing Registrar or Appellant, whichever applicable, the Filing Fees, no later than fourteen (14) calendar days after it receives the Filing Fees from the Respondent or Appellee. Such fees must be paid regardless of whether a Court Proceeding is commenced in accordance with Section 4.5 below. Failure to pay Filing Fees to the Dispute Resolution Provider may result in the loss of accreditation by ICANN. -----Original Message----- From: gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Rob Golding Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 5:51 PM To: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC
The intention, as I recall it, was to keep the TDRP the same as it is now. The Filing fee is paid to the Provider to administer the dispute. The Provider keeps that for their work, regardless of who wins or loses. The win/loss part only matters because that determines WHO pays the filing fees. I think the language might be inartful.
The explanation is even more confusing ;)
The Filing fee is paid to the Provider to administer the dispute.
The Filing Fee is paid to the Provider administer the dispute *by whomever brings the dispute action*
The Provider keeps that for their work, regardless of who wins or loses.
The Provider retains the Filing Fee as payment for their services.
The win/loss part only matters because that determines WHO pays the filing fees.
But the Filing Fee has already been paid ... It should be more like: * The Filing Fee is paid to the Provider to administer the dispute by the Claimant * The Provider holds the Filing Fee in trust until settlement after the Outcome * The Outcome Fee is limited to a maximum amount of the Filing Fee * If the Claimant Wins, Outcome Fee is to be paid by the Defendant within X days * If the Defendant Wins, Outcome Fee is to be paid from the Filing Fee, with any remainder being returned with X days OR we get into "if you win you can claim your costs from the loser" and the whole they-don’t-pay game ... Rob Have you heard the joke about Inter Registry Transfers yet ? I would tell you, but it takes 5 days ! /boom-tish/ --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt mailing list Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-irtpd-rt
Thanks all for the feedback. Theo Van: "Dorrain, Kristine" <kdorrain@adrforum.com> Aan: "Knight, Barbara" <BKnight@verisign.com>, "Theo Geurts" <theo.geurts@firstfind.nl>, "Caitlin Tubergen" <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> Cc: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Verzonden: Vrijdag 28 augustus 2015 00:22:12 Onderwerp: RE: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Yes, Barbara is right. The intention, as I recall it, was to keep the TDRP the same as it is now. The Filing fee is paid to the Provider to administer the dispute. The Provider keeps that for their work, regardless of who wins or loses. The win/loss part only matters because that determines WHO pays the filing fees. I think the language might be inartful. Kristine Kristine F. Dorrain, Esq. Director of Arbitration Forum P.O. Box 50191 Minneapolis, MN 55405 Phone 952.516.6456 Fax 866.342.0657 Email kdorrain@adrforum.com www.adrforum.com This e-mail message and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and attachments From: gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Knight, Barbara Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 2:38 PM To: Theo Geurts; Caitlin Tubergen Cc: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Hi Theo, I was under the impression that if the Filing Registrar did prevail, the non-filing registrar (the “Respondent”) would be required to send the Filing Fee to the Dispute Resolution Provider and then the Dispute Resolution Provider would return the Filing Fee to the Filing Registrar within 14 days. Section 3.3.3 addresses this. Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com t: 703-948-3343 c: 703-622-1071 12061 Bluemont Way, Reston, VA 20190 VerisignInc.com From: gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org ] On Behalf Of Theo Geurts Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:32 PM To: Caitlin Tubergen Cc: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Sorry can't make today's call. Question though about the the language used in 3.3.2 In the event that the Filing Registrar does not prevail in a dispute, the Filing Fees shall be retained by the Dispute Resolution Provider. What is the reason behind this ? I was not part of the WG, so there could be a good reason, to have the language worded like this, however it might create the impression, that it is economical favorable for the dispute provider not to rule in favor for the filing Registrar as the dispute provider then gets to keep the money ? In the scenario where the filing Registrar wins, the losing Registrar has to send the filing fee to the filing Registrar and the dispute provider does not get to keep (retain) the filing fee. Thanks, Theo Van: "Caitlin Tubergen" < caitlin.tubergen@icann.org > Aan: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Verzonden: Donderdag 27 augustus 2015 01:13:31 Onderwerp: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Hi, Team. The next IRTP-D Implementation Review Team call will be held on Thursday, 27 August at 1900UTC . We will be discussing the attached draft of the Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy, which incorporates Recommendations 3, 4, and 10. If you are unable to attend the call but have comments on the attached draft, please feel free to submit comments to the list. Also, for those of you who were unable to attend our last call, please find recordings, notes and relevant documents on the IRTP-D workspace page here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53777540 . Please find the dial-in information for the next week’s call below: Link to Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/irtpd/ *Upon logging into Adobe Connect, a pop up window will provide you the option to Dial Out to your Phone. Enter your Phone Number* (Remember to change the Country Code if needed). After joining the call, as a courtesy to others and the presenters, please MUTE your phone. This can be done by selecting *6 on your keypad. To UNMUTE select *6 again. If you are Unable to log into Adobe Connect and can only join via phone: List of International Dial In Numbers: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=6458688446&num=1-719-4... Participant Passcode: 6458688446 Best regards, Caitlin Tubergen Registrar Relations and Contracts Manager ICANN _______________________________________________ Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt mailing list Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-irtpd-rt
I’m wrapping something up and will be about 15 min late. Apologies. From: gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-impl-irtpd-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Caitlin Tubergen Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 6:14 PM To: Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt@icann.org Subject: [Gnso-impl-irtpd-rt] Reminder: IRTP-D Implementation Review Team Call 27 August 1900 UTC Hi, Team. The next IRTP-D Implementation Review Team call will be held on Thursday, 27 August at 1900UTC. We will be discussing the attached draft of the Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy, which incorporates Recommendations 3, 4, and 10. If you are unable to attend the call but have comments on the attached draft, please feel free to submit comments to the list. Also, for those of you who were unable to attend our last call, please find recordings, notes and relevant documents on the IRTP-D workspace page here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53777540. Please find the dial-in information for the next week’s call below: Link to Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/irtpd/ *Upon logging into Adobe Connect, a pop up window will provide you the option to Dial Out to your Phone. Enter your Phone Number* (Remember to change the Country Code if needed). After joining the call, as a courtesy to others and the presenters, please MUTE your phone. This can be done by selecting *6 on your keypad. To UNMUTE select *6 again. If you are Unable to log into Adobe Connect and can only join via phone: List of International Dial In Numbers: https://www.myrcplus.com/cnums.asp?bwebid=8369444&ppc=6458688446&num=1-719-4... Participant Passcode: 6458688446 ________________________________ Best regards, Caitlin Tubergen Registrar Relations and Contracts Manager ICANN
participants (5)
-
Caitlin Tubergen -
Dorrain, Kristine -
Knight, Barbara -
Rob Golding -
Theo Geurts