|
Mike and all, Thanks for the question and request for clarification. We
are preparing a response that should clarify and further explain our thinking
with some further examples. In light of several vacations – please look
for our response by early next week. Thanks again, Liz From:
owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Mike Rodenbaugh Sorry, tired today, re-sending to clarify that this is a request
for clarification from ICANN Counsel, not the GNSO Council. Thanks. From:
owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Mike Rodenbaugh Hi, I
refer to Sec. 7.1 of the Report, which ends with these sentences: The use of domain names may
be taken into account when establishing or changing registration policies.
Thus, potential changes to existing contractual provisions related to abuse in
the registration of names would be within scope of GNSO policy making. Consideration
of new policies related to the use of a domain name unrelated to its
registration would not be within scope. Could
ICANN Counsel please clarify this language? Specifically, what could be
“use of a domain name unrelated to its registration”? If this
means “any use of a domain name after it is registered”, then how
is that opinion consistent with prior enactment of the UDRP, and
Counsel’s opinion in the Issues Report re Fast Flux Hosting (Mar. 31,
2008, p. 14): General
Counsel’s opinion is that some aspects relating to the subject of fast flux
hosting are within scope of the ICANN
policy process and within the scope of the GNSO. As fast flux hosting
activities concern gTLDs, the issue is within the scope of the GNSO to address. This clarification and/or further analysis might be very helpful
for the Council in considering the latest Issues Report in the coming weeks,
before our next meeting. Thanks, Mike R. |