I'm going to take this to the global list (not forward, I will just reference Michele's blog) -----Original Message-----

From: Garth Bruen at KnujOn <gbruen@knujon.com> Sent: Jul 15, 2010 1:56 PM To: Beau Brendler <beaubrendler@earthlink.net> Cc: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: "ICANN Lose More Staff - Head of Compliance Leaves"

"Several people have made comments about how ICANN has been losing staff over the last few months. The most recent departure is their head of compliance - David Giza. His interim replacement will be Pam Little. What makes this departure noteworthy is the level of activity in the compliance department over the past 18 months - the number of registrars whose accreditations were terminated due to non-compliance increased by several hundred percent" - Michele Nelyon in a blog

http://www.irishblogs.ie/similar-to/icann-lose-more-staff-head-of-compliance...

Why did the Registrars find out first?

...

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [NA-Discuss] rumor From: Beau Brendler <beaubrendler@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, July 15, 2010 1:26 pm To: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

Far be it from me to pass on hearsay, being a responsible journalist type and all of that, but apropos of the discussion below, I heard David Giza of compliance is either leaving or has already left.

If that's the case, and far be it from me to speculate, the problems in ICANN's compliance department must be rather deep.

Anyone heard anything about this for real?

BB

-----Original Message-----

...

From: Garth Bruen at KnujOn <gbruen@knujon.com> Sent: Jul 15, 2010 10:07 AM To: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Cc: "na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, Stacy Burnette <stacy.burnette@icann.org>, bruen@coldrain.net, carlton.samuels@gmail.com, David.Giza@icann.org, langdonorr@gmail.com, beaubrendler@earthlink.net Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] A Technology Company cured all breaches? Termination reversed?

John,

Thanks for bringing this up, the issue was discussed in a Brussels session. While the breach notice ostensibly gives the Registrar 15 days to correct, the result is not seen outside of ICANN unless it results in a termination. If the Registrar does cure and how they cure is unknown and uncontested.

For example, Alantron was issued a breach notice on April 15th for not providing Port 43 WHOIS access. We, and others, have tracked them since and they continue to have regular outages.

In a different contractual time limit, one of 45 days to correct WHOIS inaccuracies, we continue to record domains remaining on-line after the 45 day period without a correction, or records being corrected only after a follow up report has been issued declaring that the record was not fixed.

My understanding of the cycle is that the Registrant has 15 days to correct the record:

<< If the registrant fails to respond "for over fifteen calendar days to inquiries by Registrar concerning the accuracy of contact details", then pursuant to RAA Subsection 3.7.7.2 the registrant is in "material breach" of its registration agreement with the registrar. That subsection also provides that "willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable information" shall constitute a material beach of the registration agreement. Under either of these circumstances, the RAA provides that the material breach of the registration agreement shall be "a basis for cancellation of the Registered Name registration." Accordingly, if the registrar's investigation results in a determination that the registrant is in material breach of its registration agreement, then in the absence of extenuating circumstances the registrar should cancel the domain registration. >> http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/advisory-10may02.htm

And the Registrar has an additional 30 days to investigate and delete the domain name: << Subsection 3.7.8 of the RAA obliges registrars to "take reasonable steps to investigate" any inaccuracy in Whois data upon notification from "any person." >>

But, as I said, we see this continuously ignored. We have one domain in question that is currently on its THIRD WDPRS.

-Garth

...

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] A Technology Company cured all breaches? Termination reversed? From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Date: Wed, July 14, 2010 8:58 pm To: "Stacy Burnette" <stacy.burnette@icann.org> Cc: "na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>

...

ICANN renewed A Technology Company's accreditation. We will continue to review the compliance allegations in an expeditious manner. As previously stated, community input is very appreciated and we will consider your recommendations.

It'd be helpful to understand more about the way that ICANN's compliance works, rather than looking it it one issue at a time.

Are ICANN's compliance plans written down anywhere? For example, when you give a notice of breach to a registrar, how long do they have to cure it, and does the time allowed vary depending on what the breach is?

Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica...

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica...

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------