seizure policy - Give us a break, Mike!

[Judith Oppenheimer <joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com>]

re my earlier posting, "remove the seizure policy",
 http://www.icann.org/comments-mail/comment-udrp/current/msg00022.html

ICANN pres Mike Roberts claims below that the seizure policies
of "various competitive registrars" domain name contracts are
not "required by an ICANN policy."

Give us a break, Mike!

ICANN's Accreditation Contract with Registrars requires, under
"Business Dealings, Including with SLD Holders", that:

> "The SLD holder shall agree that its registration of the SLD name
> shall be subject to suspension, cancellation, or transfer by any
> ICANN procedure,

"any ICANN procedure" can mean anything.

> OR by any registrar or registry administrator
> procedure approved by an ICANN-adopted policy, (1) to correct
> mistakes by Registrar or the registry administrator in registering
> the name OR ...

"mistake" can mean anything.

The "OR" between the two, means it only takes one (non?)event:
"any ICANN procedure", or a "mistake", to trigger your domain name loss.

"Any ICANN procedure" or "registrar or registry administrator mistake"
can trigger your domain name loss.

Period.

Neither need be substantiated, or even explained.

No due process or compensation is offered the losing domain name holder.

Therefore, *all* ICANN registrars *must* (and in fact do) have domain
name holders "... agree that we may, in our sole discretion, delete or
transfer
your domain name at any time."

It is the only way for registrars to ensure their own compliance
with their contractual obligation to ICANN, and to maintain their
accreditation.

Mr. Roberts also complains that, "...until [I] raised the issue recently,
[there'd been no] substantive opposition to this provision."

Here we agree.  The grounds for opposition are substantive indeed.

Judith Oppenheimer



Mike Roberts wrote:

> Dear Ms. Oppenheimer:
>
> Thank you for submitting your recent comment ("remove the seizure policy")
> to the ICANN web site concerning the implementation documents for the
> uniform dispute resolution policy that were posted earlier this week.
> While I appreciate your concerns, they seem to be directed at the
> provisions of contracts by which various competitive registrars are
> choosing to do business with their customers, rather than at anything
> required by an ICANN policy.
>
> The posted uniform dispute resolution policy does not contain the
> language you cite providing for registrars to have sole discretion to
> cancel domain names.  In fact, quite to the contrary, Paragraph 7 of the
> policy provides that registrars "will not cancel, transfer, activate,
> deactivate, or otherwise change the status of any domain name
> registration under this Policy" except under defined circumstances.
> These include: instructions from the domain name holder; receipt of a
> decision of a court or neutral administrative panel, as agreed by
> the registrar and domain-name holder in the registration agreement;
> or pursuant to other legal requirements.
>
> Similarly, the Registrar Accreditation Agreement does not require that
> registrars have sole discretion to take away domain names. Section I.7.i
> of the current accreditation agreement says:
>
> "The SLD holder shall agree that its registration of the SLD name
> shall be subject to suspension, cancellation, or transfer by any
> ICANN procedure, or by any registrar or registry administrator
> procedure approved by an ICANN-adopted policy, (1) to correct
> mistakes by Registrar or the registry administrator in registering
> the name or (2) for the resolution of disputes concerning the SLD
> name."
>
> The accreditation agreement language in paragraph I.7.i has been in place
> since last March when it was adopted by the ICANN Board following an
> extensive public comment period and in connection with substantial
> revisions to the initial staff draft based on community comment.  There
> was not then, nor since then until you raised the issue recently, been any
> substantive opposition to this provision.
>
> The Accreditation Agreement does not prescribe language for the agreements
> between registrars and domain-name holders, but instead simply states
> minimum policy-based requirements.  Beyond these requirements, the
> marketplace is allowed to determine the terms under which registrars and
> domain-name holders will deal.
>
> This approach allows the parties to choose provisions that reflect local
> business conditions, legal jurisdictions, and other considerations.  ICANN
> has neither the authority nor the resources to be a consumer protection
> agency, and in any event there are existing protections for abuses of this
> type such as better business bureaus, trade commissions, etc in most of
> the countries in which domain name activity is present.
>
> - Mike Roberts
>   Interim President/CEO, ICANN

--
Judith Oppenheimer, 1 800 The Expert, 212 684-7210
mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com
Publisher of ICB Toll Free News: http://icbtollfree.com
Publisher of WhoSells800.com: http://whosells800.com
Moderator TOLLFREE-L: http://www.egroups.com/group/tollfree-l/info.html
President of ICB Consultancy: http://JudithOppenheimer.com