|
Mike
and all, Thank
you for your inquiry. The sentences you asked about in the registration
abuse issues report should be read in the context of the preceding sentences in
that paragraph, which read as follows: "Note,
section 4.2.3 of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement between ICANN and
accredited registrars provides for the establishment of new and revised
consensus policies concerning the registration of domain names, including abuse
in the registration of names, but policies involving the use of a domain name (unrelated
to its registration) are outside the scope of policies that ICANN could enforce
on registries and/or registrars." For
your reference, RAA section 4.2.3 provides that ICANN may obligate registrars
to implement new policies concerning the "resolution of disputes
concerning the registration of Registered Names (as opposed to the use of such
domain names), including where the policies take into account use of the domain
names ..." <http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm#4.2.3> In
the case of fast flux we said that some aspects of fast flux hosting are within
scope because fast flux involves the rapid update of nameserver registration
records in gTLDs. Rapid update of nameserver registration records
specifically involves the registration of names, which can be distinguished
from a case where a name, once registered, resolves to a site that contains
infringing or otherwise abusive content. While ICANN could change policy
with regard to updates of nameserver registration records, ICANN might not be
able to impose any new obligations on registrars concerning pure content/use
disputes. Please
let me know if you have any further questions. Thanks,
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. |