Are we talking about changing the way UDRP and URS handle
privacy/proxy situations? I think that is outside of the
scope of this WG.
Hello All,
I have given more thought about the discussion
concerning accredited proxy vendors versus all other
unaccredited proxy vendors, including lawyers. It
seems to me that we are never going to be able to
capture each variation of the unaccredited proxy vendor
and James brought up a point that I think we should
consider.
If accredited proxy vendors adhere to all the
requirements we are describing they will have the
benefit of not being considered the registrant of the
domain name.
Any other type of unaccredited proxy service should
simply not exist and they should always be considered
the registrant with all the rights and liabilities that
go along with being the registrant. We simply would not
recognize any other existing relationship.
We could make this very clear Accredited proxy or
registrant and not delve into all the grey areas.
The unaccredited proxy provider would be considered
the Registrant in all actions including the URS and
UDRP.
I am hoping we can discuss further on the call
tomorrow.
Best,
Susan Kawaguchi
Facebook, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg