On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 07:28:36AM +0000, Susan Kawaguchi wrote:
I am uncomfortable with not addressing best practices for proxy registrations. I agree with the argument that a registrar does not have knowledge of the contractual agreement between the proxy service and licensee (or in my view the "true" registrant) if there is no relationship between the proxy service provider and the registrar. For instance, I may request a law firm to register a domain name on behalf of Facebook. The registrar does not have any idea what contractual agreement exists between Facebook and the law firm.
From the ICANN point of view, the registration is done by the law firm so the domain has an owner-c pointing to the law firm and the admin-c pointing to a law firm's attorney (that's the point of proxy services).
So for all policies within ICANN the contract between the law firm and Facebook is irrelevant. The law firm is the true registrant. It's up to Facebook to have a contract with allows them to control the proxy service. It's not ICANN's duty. Plain and simple. So far from the Dakar meeting. You points are valid, if proxy services are considered as beeing not the real registrant. Then a full blown new construct within ICANN needs to be established.